Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 2010-01
Reductionism's long shadow: Commentary on “Where developmental psychology and neuroscience meet: A threatening or a felicitous encounter?” by María-José Rodrigo
As María-José Rodrigo clearly claims, contributions from neuroscience are fundamental to better understand behavioural processes of change throughout life. However, this optimism needs an epistemological reflection on the kind of relations between these two different levels of analysis (neurological and psychological), as well as on the reductionism dangers derived from attempting to explain changes at one level (normally, the psychological level) by appealing to changes at the other level (neurological level). The author's text is a thorough development of these ideas.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
DamasioA. R. (2003). Looking for Spinoza: Joy, sorrow and the feeling brain.Orlando, FL: Harcourt Books. KaganJ. (2006). Biology's useful contribution. A comment.Human Development, 49, 310–314.
2.
Karmiloff-SmithA. (1992). Beyond modularity. A developmental perspective on cognitive science.Cambridge, MA: MIT Press [Trad. cast. de J. C. Gómez & M. Núñez, Más allá de la modularidad.Madrid: Alianza, 1994].
3.
Karmiloff-SmithA. (1998). Developmental itself is the key to understand developmental disorders.Trends in cognitive sciences, 2 (10), 389–398.
4.
PiagetJ. (1970). Epistémologie des sciences de l'homme.Paris: Gallimard.
5.
ThelenE.SmithL. B. (1994). A dynamic systems approach to the development of cognition and action.Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
