Objeções materialistas contra o dualismo cartesiano

I discuss five basic objections materialists often raise to Cartesian Mind-Body Dualism: (1). It is not empirically testable or confirmable; (2). It is in principle testable and confirmable, but unconfirmed; (3). It is testable and confirmable, but has been shown false; (4). It is unnecessary to explain anything; and (5). It cannot serve to explain anything. I will show how unsatisfactory all these objections are. If I am right in what I argue the reductionist posture of contemporary materialism against the existence of Cartesian Immaterial Substances as causal agents in explaining human behavior, is demonstrably more dogma than anything else. Moreover, the promise of reductive materialism to explain human personality, consciousness, and behavior is unlikely ever to be fulfilled.Discutiremos cinco objeções básicas que os materialistas geralmente levantam contra o dualismo mente-corpo cartesiano: (1) Ele não é empiricamente testável ou confirmável; (2) É em princípio testável e confirmável, mas não confirmado; (3) É testável e confirmável, mas foi provado falso; (4) É desnecessário para explicar qualquer coisa; e (5) Não pode servir para explicar coisa alguma. Mostraremos como todas essas objeções são insatisfatórias. Se eu estiver certo em minha argumentação, a postura reducionista do materialismo contemporâneo contra a existência de substâncias cartesianas imateriais como agentes causais para a explicação do comportamento humano é demonstravelmente um dogma mais do que qualquer outra coisa. Ademais, a promessa do materialismo reducionista de explicar a personalidade humana, a consciência e o comportamento tampouco pode ser jamais realizada

A Primer on Cognitive Errors Illustrated Through the Lens of a Neurosurgical Practice

Problem Statement: Diagnostic error is often attributed to cognitive errors, including biased thinking patterns, rather than knowledge or data limitations, and education on cognitive bias deserves review in all spheres of practice. Background: The cognitive biases of practitioners create an inherent fallibility in recognizing and treating medical conditions. Awareness of cognitive errors is valuable for mitigating risk of diagnostic error. The impact of cognitive error is substantial in the management of neurosurgically relevant disease. Remarkably broad differential diagnoses often accompany neurologic symptoms. Both focal and non-focal symptoms lend themselves to diagnostic inertia that contributes to errors. Further, initial diagnostic direction can be inaccurate in the involved biological system, anatomic localization, and the pathologic process; thus delaying diagnosis and potentially courting severe consequences. The authors present neurosurgical cases to illustrate the major types of unconscious cognitive errors in medicine using clinically relevant vignettes. Strategies to mitigate cognitive error are also reviewed. Application/Recommendations: Awareness of the types of cognitive errors and de-biasing strategies are valuable to avoid faulty estimation of disease likelihood, avoid overlooking all relevant possibilities, and mitigate error in critical thinking. Recognition that all clinicians are vulnerable to cognitive error exposes the importance of strategies to reduce biases. Efforts to reduce error in medicine can be approached strategically by working to reduce bias and increase discipline in clinical reasoning

A Primer on Cognitive Errors Illustrated Through the Lens of a Neurosurgical Practice

Problem Statement: Diagnostic error is often attributed to cognitive errors, including biased thinking patterns, rather than knowledge or data limitations, and education on cognitive bias deserves review in all spheres of practice. Background: The cognitive biases of practitioners create an inherent fallibility in recognizing and treating medical conditions. Awareness of cognitive errors is valuable for mitigating risk of diagnostic error. The impact of cognitive error is substantial in the management of neurosurgically relevant disease. Remarkably broad differential diagnoses often accompany neurologic symptoms. Both focal and non-focal symptoms lend themselves to diagnostic inertia that contributes to errors. Further, initial diagnostic direction can be inaccurate in the involved biological system, anatomic localization, and the pathologic process; thus delaying diagnosis and potentially courting severe consequences. The authors present neurosurgical cases to illustrate the major types of unconscious cognitive errors in medicine using clinically relevant vignettes. Strategies to mitigate cognitive error are also reviewed. Application/Recommendations: Awareness of the types of cognitive errors and de-biasing strategies are valuable to avoid faulty estimation of disease likelihood, avoid overlooking all relevant possibilities, and mitigate error in critical thinking. Recognition that all clinicians are vulnerable to cognitive error exposes the importance of strategies to reduce biases. Efforts to reduce error in medicine can be approached strategically by working to reduce bias and increase discipline in clinical reasoning