Where the standard approach in comparative neuroscience fails and where it works: General intelligence and brain asymmetries

Comparative Cognition and Behavior Reviews 13:95-98 (2018)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Although brain size and the concept of intelligence have been extensively used in comparative neuroscience to study cognition and its evolution, such coarse-grained traits may not be informative enough about important aspects of neurocognitive systems. By taking into account the different evolutionary trajectories and the selection pressures on neurophysiology across species, Logan and colleagues suggest that the cognitive abilities of an organism should be investigated by considering the fine-grained and species-specific phenotypic traits that characterize it. In such a way, we would avoid adopting human-oriented, coarse-grained traits, typical of the standard approach in cognitive neuroscience. We argue that this standard approach can fail in some cases, but can, however, work in others, by discussing two major topics in contemporary neuroscience as examples: general intelligence and brain asymmetries.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive

External links

  • This entry has no external links. Add one.
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Domains of generality.Andrew Buskell & Marta Halina - 2017 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 40.
A property cluster theory of cognition.Cameron Buckner - 2013 - Philosophical Psychology (3):1-30.

Analytics

Added to PP
2018-07-23

Downloads
558 (#48,952)

6 months
84 (#74,828)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Davide Serpico
Università degli Studi di Milano

References found in this work

Mechanisms and natural kinds.Carl F. Craver - 2009 - Philosophical Psychology 22 (5):575-594.

Add more references