Search (4 results, page 1 of 1)

0.0018756052 = product of:
  0.028134076 = sum of:
    0.028134076 = weight(_text_:und in 5570) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.028134076 = score(doc=5570,freq=10.0), product of:
        0.06422601 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028978055 = queryNorm
        0.438048 = fieldWeight in 5570, product of:
          3.1622777 = tf(freq=10.0), with freq of:
            10.0 = termFreq=10.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5570)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)

Abstract

Die Freiheit des menschlichen Denkens steht zur Debatte. Prominente Vertreter der neuesten Hirnforschung bestreiten sie grundsätzlich. Zu Unrecht, wie der Neurologe und Philosoph Detlef B. Linke mit guten Gründen meint. Er zeigt, dass der Kreativität und der Zeit eine zentrale Rolle im menschlichen Denken und Handeln zukommt, und weshalb sich genau darin die Freiheit des Denkens manifestiert.

0.0013909859 = product of:
  0.020864788 = sum of:
    0.020864788 = weight(_text_:und in 3572) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.020864788 = score(doc=3572,freq=22.0), product of:
        0.06422601 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028978055 = queryNorm
        0.3248651 = fieldWeight in 3572, product of:
          4.690416 = tf(freq=22.0), with freq of:
            22.0 = termFreq=22.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.03125 = fieldNorm(doc=3572)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)

Abstract

Autonomie gilt als zentrale menschliche Eigenschaft. Doch sie gerät von vielen Seiten unter Beschuss: Die Neurowissenschaft erklärt, der Wille sei nicht frei, die Sozialpsychologie zeigt in ihren Experimenten ebenso wie Shitstorms im Internet, wie mächtig der Anpassungsdruck ist. Die Auswirkungen sind beträchtlich, wenn unsere Autonomie in Gefahr ist. Harald Welzer und Michael Pauen analysieren die Situation auf Grundlage eigener Experimente und Forschungen, um Möglichkeiten der Gegenwehr sichtbar zu machen: Wie können Gemeinschaften so gestaltet werden, dass Konformitätszwänge gering bleiben? Gleichzeitig zeigen sie, dass es wirksame Gegenstrategien nur auf der sozialen Ebene geben kann - solange wichtige Freiheitsspielräume noch bestehen. Die Zeit drängt.

Content

Einleitung -- Der Begriff der Autonomie -- Autonomie als Fähigkeit zu selbstbestimmtem Handeln gegen Widerstände -- Selbstbestimmung -- Autonomie, Heteronomie und Anomie -- Autonomie und Freiheit -- Autonomie als natürliche Eigenschaft -- Autonomie und Sozialität -- Das Paradoxon der Autonomie -- Der Sinn der Konformität -- Konformismus und Gruppendynamik -- Autonomie und Gesellschaft -- Fazit -- Geschichte der Autonomie -- Der Prozess der Zivilisation -- Geschichte der Autonomievorstellungen -- Utopische Entwürfe -- Sozialvertragstheorien -- Autonomie und Erziehung -- Autonomie in der Philosophie -- Decadence -- Russische Utopien zu Beginn des 20. Jahrhunderts -- Fazit -- Empirische Erkenntnisse -- Fallstudien -- Konformitätsexperimente -- Handlungsspielräume des Selbst : ein Forschungsprojekt -- Moralisches Urteilen -- Konformismus und Evolution -- Wege zur Sicherung von Autonomie -- Autonomie Heute -- Die Bürde der Freiheit -- Eine andere Form von Totalitarismus -- Ein irritierendes Erlebnis -- Shifting baselines -- Die Sicherung des Rechtsstaats -- Gleichschaltung -- Der Circle : ein narratives Szenario -- Die schleichende Veränderung sozialer Standards -- Das Verschwinden des Geheimnisses -- Konformismus und Cybermobbing -- Selbstüberwachung -- Versicherungen : Verträge auf Verhalten -- Eine Verteidigung der Autonomie -- Dialektik der Autonomie -- Wie man Autonomie verteidigt -- Danksagung -- Anmerkungen -- Literatur -- Namen- und Sachregister.

6.2909705E-4 = product of:
  0.009436456 = sum of:
    0.009436456 = weight(_text_:und in 3623) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.009436456 = score(doc=3623,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.06422601 = queryWeight, product of:
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.028978055 = queryNorm
        0.14692576 = fieldWeight in 3623, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          2.216367 = idf(docFreq=13101, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=3623)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)

Abstract

Julian Nida-Rümelin, Professor für politische Theorie und Philosophie in München, widmet sich in fünf Kapiteln einem der großen klassischen Themen der Philosophie: Warum die Annahme menschlicher Freiheit begründet ist - Warum Entscheidungen notwenig frei sind - Warum es keine Verantwortung ohne Freiheit gibt - Warum der Zufall moralisch irrelevant ist - Warum Menschenwürde auf Freiheit beruht.

9.302266E-5 = product of:
  0.0013953398 = sum of:
    0.0013953398 = product of:
      0.0027906797 = sum of:
        0.0027906797 = weight(_text_:information in 4561) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
          0.0027906797 = score(doc=4561,freq=4.0), product of:
            0.050870337 = queryWeight, product of:
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.028978055 = queryNorm
            0.054858685 = fieldWeight in 4561, product of:
              2.0 = tf(freq=4.0), with freq of:
                4.0 = termFreq=4.0
              1.7554779 = idf(docFreq=20772, maxDocs=44218)
              0.015625 = fieldNorm(doc=4561)
      0.5 = coord(1/2)
  0.06666667 = coord(1/15)

Content

In which I introduce the ancient mind-body problem, explain why I am on a quest to use reason and empirical inquiry to solve it, acquaint you with Francis Crick, explain how he relates to this quest, make a confession, and end on a sad note -- In which I write about the wellsprings of my inner conflict between religion and reason, why I grew up wanting to be a scientist, why I wear a lapel pin of Professor Calculus, and how I acquired a second mentor late in life -- In which I explain why consciousness challenges the scientific view of the world, how consciousness can be investigated empirically with both feet firmly planted on the ground, why animals share consciousness with humans, and why self-consciousness is not as important as many people think it is -- In which you hear tales of scientist-magicians that make you look but not see, how they track the footprints of consciousness by peering into your skull, why you don't see with your eyes, and why attention and consciousness are not the same -- In which you learn from neurologists and neurosurgeons that some neurons care a great deal about celebrities, that cutting the cerebral cortex in two does not reduce consciousness by half, that color is leached from the world by the loss of a small cortical region, and that the destruction of a sugar cube-sized chunk of brain stem or thalamic tissue leaves you undead -- In which I defend two propositions that my younger self found nonsense--you are unaware of most of the things that go on in your head, and zombie agents control much of your life, even though you confidently believe that you are in charge -- In which I throw caution to the wind, bring up free will, Der ring des Nibelungen, and what physics says about determinism, explain the impoverished ability of your mind to choose, show that your will lags behind your brain's decision, and that freedom is just another word for feeling -- In which I argue that consciousness is a fundamental property of complex things, rhapsodize about integrated information theory, how it explains many puzzling facts about consciousness and provides a blueprint for building sentient machines -- In which I outline an electromagnetic gadget to measure consciousness, describe efforts to harness the power of genetic engineering to track consciousness in mice, and find myself building cortical observatories -- In which I muse about final matters considered off-limits to polite scientific discourse: to wit, the relationship between science and religion, the existence of God, whether this God can intervene in the universe, the death of my mentor, and my recent tribulations.

Footnote

Now it might seem that is a fairly well-defined scientific task: just figure out how the brain does it. In the end I think that is the right attitude to have. But our peculiar history makes it difficult to have exactly that attitude-to take consciousness as a biological phenomenon like digestion or photosynthesis, and figure out how exactly it works as a biological phenomenon. Two philosophical obstacles cast a shadow over the whole subject. The first is the tradition of God, the soul, and immortality. Consciousness is not a part of the ordinary biological world of digestion and photosynthesis: it is part of a spiritual world. It is sometimes thought to be a property of the soul and the soul is definitely not a part of the physical world. The other tradition, almost as misleading, is a certain conception of Science with a capital "S." Science is said to be "reductionist" and "materialist," and so construed there is no room for consciousness in Science. If it really exists, consciousness must really be something else. It must be reducible to something else, such as neuron firings, computer programs running in the brain, or dispositions to behavior. There are also a number of purely technical difficulties to neurobiological research. The brain is an extremely complicated mechanism with about a hundred billion neurons in ... (Rest nicht frei). " [https://www.nybooks.com/articles/2013/01/10/can-information-theory-explain-consciousness/].