Neurophilosophy is the interdisciplinary study of neuroscience and philosophy. Work in this field is often separated into two distinct methods. The first method attempts to solve problems in philosophy of mind with empirical information from the neurosciences. The second method attempts to clarify neuroscientific results using the conceptual rigor and methods of philosophy of science.

Neurophilosophy explores the relevance of neuroscientific data to arguments in philosophy of mind. Prominent philosophers in this field are Daniel Dennett and David Chalmers. Neurophilosophy makes the claim that thought, knowledge, beliefs, and reasoning are functions of the brain and will eventually be explained in terms of neurons, synapses, and the details of human brain structure. This scientific approach contrasts strongly with idealism, and/or the appeal to the existence of a Platonic soul that thinks, feels and desires. Brain based materialist explanations such as the appreciation of color vision typify neurophilosophy, whereas other approaches may involve qualia or sense data being organized by an independent mind.” <wiki>

More on the definition and issues regarding the philosophy of neuroscience.

Interested in more online lectures on neuroscience in general?

Try out Nature‘s neuroscience podcast, NeuroPod.

Also, check these out…

Pufendorf lectures: Patricia Churchland <download>

  • What is Neurophilosophy?
  • A Perspective on Self, Agency, and Free Will
  • ‘Inference’ to the Best Decision
  • Brain-based Values