An argument recently proposed by Chirimuuta (2014) seems to motivate the rejection of the claims that every neurocognitive phenomenon can have a mechanistic explanation and that every neurocognitive explanation is mechanistic. In this paper, I focus on efficient coding models involving the so-called "canonical neural computations" and argue that although they imply some form of pluralism, they are compatible with two mechanistic generalizations: all neurocognitive explanations are (at least in part) mechanistic; and all neurocognitive phenomena that have an explanation have (at least) a purely mechanistic explanation.
CITATION STYLE
Paz, A. W. (2017). Pluralistic mechanism. Theoria (Spain), 32(2), 161–175. https://doi.org/10.1387/theoria.16877
Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.