Empirical Evidence for Intraspecific Multiple Realization?
Francesca Strappini, Marialuisa Martelli, Cesare Cozzo, Enrico Di Pace
Frontiers in Psychology January 1, 2020 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01676 (opens in new tab) via PubMed
Summary
AI-generated from the abstractMultiple realizability—the idea that the same mental property can arise from different neural substrates—has long been debated. Evidence from visual crowding shows that object recognition can be restored by increasing spacing between parts, whether in agnosic foveal vision, peripheral vision, or various patient groups. Comparing stroke patients, posterior cortical atrophy patients, strabismic amblyopia cases, and unimpaired subjects tested in the periphery reveals that restored recognition (integration) describes visual performance similarly across all cases, despite differing etiologies and neural correlates. This similarity in psychological function across diverse neural bases provides empirical support for the Multiple Realization Thesis, challenging psychoneural type-identity theory and reductionism.
Study at a glance
| Characteristics | Comparative case series with cross-referencing of patient data and unimpaired controls Case report Peer reviewed |
|---|---|
| Sample size | 12 |
| Population | Patients with visual impairments (two stroke patients, two with posterior cortical atrophy, six with strabismic amblyopia, one with restored sight) and unimpaired subjects tested in the periphery |
| Keywords | Antireductionism Crowding Functionalism Identity theory Multiple realizability |
| Key finding | Restored object recognition (integration) describes visual performance similarly across patients with different neural damage and unimpaired subjects, supporting the Multiple Realization Thesis. |
Abstract
Despite the remarkable advances in behavioral and brain sciences over the last decades, the mind-body (brain) problem is still an open debate and one of the most intriguing questions for both cognitive neuroscience and philosophy of mind. Traditional approaches have conceived this problem in terms of a contrast between physicalist monism and Cartesian dualism. However, since the late sixties, the landscape of philosophical views on the problem has become more varied and complex. The Multiple Realization Thesis (MRT) claims that mental properties can be (or are) realized, and mental processes can be (or are) implemented by neural correlates of different kinds. Thus, MRT challenges the psychoneural type-identity theory and the corresponding reductionism. Many philosophers have acknowledged the a priori plausibility of MRT. However, the existence of empirical evidence in favor of intraspecific, human multiple realizations of mental processes and properties is still controversial. Here, we illustrate some cases that provide empirical evidence in support of MRT. Recently, it has been proposed that foveal agnosic vision, like peripheral vision, can be restored by increasing object parts' spacing (Crutch and Warrington, 2007; Strappini et al., 2017b). Agnosic fovea and normal periphery are both limited by crowding, which impairs object recognition, and provides the signature of visual integration. Here, we define a psychological property of restored object identification, and we cross-reference the data of visually impaired patients with different etiologies. In particular, we compare the data of two stroke patients, two patients with posterior cortical atrophy, six cases of strabismic amblyopia, and one case with restored sight. We also compare these patients with unimpaired subjects tested in the periphery. We show that integration (i.e., restored recognition) seems to describe quite accurately the visual performance in all these cases. Whereas the patients have different etiologies and different neural correlates, the unimpaired subjects have no neural damage. Thus, similarity in the psychological property given the differences in the neural substrate can be interpreted in relation to MRT and provide evidence in its support. Finally, we will frame our contribution within the current debate concerning MRT providing new and compelling empirical evidence.