% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded. This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.
@PHDTHESIS{Dorsch:567603,
author = {Dorsch, Marianne Cornelia},
othercontributors = {Groß, Dominik and Clusmann, Hans},
title = {{D}as {L}eib-{S}eele-{P}roblem im medizinhistorischen
{K}ontext : ein kritischer {V}ergleich von {R}ené
{D}escartes und {A}ntónio {D}amásio},
school = {RWTH Aachen},
type = {Dissertation},
address = {Aachen},
reportid = {RWTH-2016-00851},
pages = {1 Online-Ressource (149 Seiten) : Illustrationen},
year = {2016},
note = {Veröffentlicht auf dem Publikationsserver der RWTH Aachen
University; Dissertation, RWTH Aachen, 2016},
abstract = {This doctoral thesis compares the theories of both René
Descartes and António Damásio regarding their examination
of the mind-body problem. The pivotal question of the
mind-body problem is how mental states behave to physical
states. René Descartes represents an interactional dualism
looking at body and mind as different entities on the one
hand, but also positing a relationship between body and mind
on the other. Damásio criticizes Descartes’ dualism based
on his knowledge of modern neuroscience. He militates
against a disjunction of body and mind: according to
Damásio the body forms a frame of reference for all
neuronal processes, which in conjunction produce
consciousness. Whereas both scientists differ in their
personal and professional background, they resemble each
other in their critical attitude towards the science of
their time, their reforming efforts, and their habit of
publishing for both a professional and popular audience. As
regards objective targets, theoretical parameters and manner
of reasoning both scientists vary considerably from each
other: Descartes intends to revolutionize all sciences by
creating a methodic, universally valid fundamental concept.
Damásios aim is changes in therapeutic concepts in western
medicine. In his investigations Descartes works on a
metaphysical and epistemological level and stands for an
exclusive and hypothetic dualism, which should be considered
as ideal and hypothetic. Damásio in contrast works on an
empirical and experimental level. Damásio does not engage
in a direct discussion of Descartes’ argument; Damásio
instead limits his reasoning to a criticism of dualism and
does not observe the supplement “interactional”. He
directs his criticism not only at Descartes, but also at
society, especially the medical fraternity. Damásio does
not appropriately correct the “error”, furthermore he
steps out of his own scientific field by using
neurobiological determinism of the human mind to falsify
Descartes’ experiment of fundamental principles. Complex
questions as the mind-body problem cannot be resolved by an
accusation of error based on weak reasoning. They cannot be
resolved through one discipline alone. Therefore their
development is in need of an interdisciplinary, constructive
collaboration following universal standards.},
cin = {524000-2},
ddc = {610},
cid = {$I:(DE-82)524000-2_20140620$},
typ = {PUB:(DE-HGF)11},
urn = {urn:nbn:de:hbz:82-rwth-2016-008516},
url = {https://publications.rwth-aachen.de/record/567603},
}
guest ::