Political Ideologies through the Lens of Modern Neuroscience

V. Bazhanov
{"title":"Political Ideologies through the Lens of Modern Neuroscience","authors":"V. Bazhanov","doi":"10.5840/eps202259110","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article presents the standpoint that naturalistic tendencies in modern science, which are especially expressed in neuroscience, push up social knowledge toward the need to revise its attitudes and norms, which consist in consistent sociocentrism and biophobia, and, hence, a simplified understanding of the phenomenon of “genetic reductionism”. We show that the application of the methods of natural science to social disciplines often marked visible progress and even conceptual breakthroughs in their development. Achievements of modern neuroscience affect a traditional area of social and humanitarian knowledge as political science, which leads to the formation of an independent area of research – political neuroscience. Through the optics of this research, cognitive styles characteristic of individuals and social groups with different value orientations imply the dominance of certain ideological sympathies and antipathies, which attributed to the opposite poles of the ideological scale – liberalism and conservatism. Considerable empirical material allows us to conclude that these ideological positions are exist due to differences in their ontogenetic “foundations”, which allows us to develop I. Kant's ideas about a priorism and transcendentalism in the context of the Kantian research program in contemporary neuroscience. The result of the implementation of this program to the political sphere was the discovery of the genesis of political views, and the demonstration of the peculiarities of their dynamics. They are based on the difference in the activity of certain neural sets, which in their turn are influenced by culture and society, forming an integral system “brain – culture – society”, where each component of which affects other components. Features and changes in the socio-cultural context of the development of an individual or a group of people may have an effect upon the architectonics of the brain and shift, due to its plasticity, of the political views along the scale of ideologies “liberalism – conservatism”. At the same time, carriers of different cognitive styles and, therefore, with a sufficient degree of probability of ideological views, percept the world in which they live in differently, and evaluate its past and possible future in diverse ways.","PeriodicalId":369041,"journal":{"name":"Epistemology & Philosophy of Science","volume":"243 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Epistemology & Philosophy of Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5840/eps202259110","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The article presents the standpoint that naturalistic tendencies in modern science, which are especially expressed in neuroscience, push up social knowledge toward the need to revise its attitudes and norms, which consist in consistent sociocentrism and biophobia, and, hence, a simplified understanding of the phenomenon of “genetic reductionism”. We show that the application of the methods of natural science to social disciplines often marked visible progress and even conceptual breakthroughs in their development. Achievements of modern neuroscience affect a traditional area of social and humanitarian knowledge as political science, which leads to the formation of an independent area of research – political neuroscience. Through the optics of this research, cognitive styles characteristic of individuals and social groups with different value orientations imply the dominance of certain ideological sympathies and antipathies, which attributed to the opposite poles of the ideological scale – liberalism and conservatism. Considerable empirical material allows us to conclude that these ideological positions are exist due to differences in their ontogenetic “foundations”, which allows us to develop I. Kant's ideas about a priorism and transcendentalism in the context of the Kantian research program in contemporary neuroscience. The result of the implementation of this program to the political sphere was the discovery of the genesis of political views, and the demonstration of the peculiarities of their dynamics. They are based on the difference in the activity of certain neural sets, which in their turn are influenced by culture and society, forming an integral system “brain – culture – society”, where each component of which affects other components. Features and changes in the socio-cultural context of the development of an individual or a group of people may have an effect upon the architectonics of the brain and shift, due to its plasticity, of the political views along the scale of ideologies “liberalism – conservatism”. At the same time, carriers of different cognitive styles and, therefore, with a sufficient degree of probability of ideological views, percept the world in which they live in differently, and evaluate its past and possible future in diverse ways.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
现代神经科学视角下的政治意识形态
本文提出的观点是,现代科学中的自然主义倾向,特别是在神经科学中表现出来的自然主义倾向,促使社会知识需要修正其态度和规范,这些态度和规范存在于一贯的社会中心主义和生物恐惧症中,因此是对“遗传还原论”现象的简化理解。我们发现,将自然科学的方法应用于社会学科,往往标志着社会学科发展的明显进步,甚至是概念上的突破。现代神经科学的成就影响了作为政治科学的社会和人道主义知识的传统领域,从而形成了一个独立的研究领域——政治神经科学。通过本研究的视角,具有不同价值取向的个体和社会群体的认知风格特征暗示了某种意识形态的同情和反感的主导地位,这归因于意识形态尺度的对立两极——自由主义和保守主义。大量的经验材料使我们能够得出结论,这些意识形态立场的存在是由于它们的个体发生“基础”的差异,这使我们能够在康德在当代神经科学中的研究计划的背景下发展康德关于先验主义和先验主义的思想。在政治领域实施这一计划的结果是发现了政治观点的起源,并展示了其动态的特殊性。它们基于某些神经组活动的差异,而这些神经组又受到文化和社会的影响,形成了一个完整的系统“大脑-文化-社会”,其中每个组成部分都会影响其他组成部分。个体或群体发展的社会文化背景的特征和变化可能对大脑的结构产生影响,并由于其可塑性,沿着意识形态“自由主义-保守主义”的尺度转变政治观点。同时,不同认知风格的载体,也因此具有足够程度的意识形态观点的概率,以不同的方式感知他们所生活的世界,并以不同的方式评价这个世界的过去和可能的未来。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Popper and His Popular Critics: Thomas Kuhn, Paul Feyerabend and Imre Lakatos: Appendix Has Science Ever Been “Normal”? A Reply to “How is Post-Normal Science Possible?” by Lada Shipovalova On the Universality of Philosophical Reflection: Reply to Critics The History of Science in the Context of the State Ideology Criticism of Cartesian Account of Self-Knowledge in English-speaking Analytic Philosophy
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1