Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Critical Neuroscience: Linking Neuroscience and Society through Critical Practice

  • Article
  • Published:
BioSocieties Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We outline the framework of the new project of Critical Neuroscience: a reflexive scientific practice that responds to the social, cultural and political challenges posed by the advances in the behavioural and brain sciences. Indeed, the new advances in neuroscience have given rise to growing projects of the sociology of neuroscience as well as neuroethics. In parallel, however, there is also a growing gulf between social studies of neuroscience and empirical neuroscience itself. This is where Critical Neuroscience finds its place. Here, we begin with a sketch of several forms of critique that can contribute to developing a model of critical scientific practice. We then describe a set of core activities that jointly make up the practice of Critical Neuroscience as it can be applied and practised both within and outside of neuroscience. We go on to propose three possible areas of application: (1) the problems related to new possibilities of neuropharmacological interventions; (2) the importance of culture, and the problems of reductionism, in psychiatry; (3) the use of imaging data from neuroscience in the law as alleged evidence about ‘human nature’.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 1 The project was initiated recently with an interdisciplinary workshop at the Division of Social and Transcultural Psychiatry, McGill University, Montreal, called ‘Critical Neuroscience’ (15 and 16 July 2008). Our activities are associated with the European Platform for Mind Science, Life Sciences and Humanities research group ‘Neuroscience in Context’, funded since 2007 by the German Volkswagen foundation (see: www.nic-online.eu).

  2. 2 How readily and uncritically such an incorporation can be effected is demonstrated by recent work on the practical effects of a (flawed) scientific denial of free will: Vohs and Schooler (2008) have shown that a newly acquired belief in determinism significantly increases the tendency to cheat among a group of student subjects. The ‘seductive allure’ of neuroscientific explanations has been documented by Skolnick Weisberg et al. (2008).

  3. 3 Philosophically, this understanding of how ‘facts’ are disclosed and constituted in scientific practices resembles the pragmatist version of philosophical naturalism developed by Joseph Rouse (2002). This view holds that facts, although robustly anchored in nature, are constitutively bound up with the human practices that meaningfully respond to them. There is thus no chance of getting hold of ‘pure’ facts, of ‘naked’ reality stripped of its relations to human interests and concerns. Note that this view does not at all amount to a version of relativism or anti-realism, although it captures the correct intuitions underlying some of these views. See also Rouse (1996).

  4. 4 In particular, some key elements of Critical Theory as it originated in the Frankfurt School inspire our work, but this does not constitute the only possible critical framework. For reasons of space, we can only hint at this background here. See Geuss (1981) and Honneth (1986) for detailed philosophical assessments, and Honneth (2007) for a recent update on the current situation of Critical Theory, especially with regard to the helpful notion of ‘social pathologies of reason’. Martin Hartmann (2009), provides a valuable first assessment of the relevance of the Frankfurtian sense of critique to current neuroscientific research and applications.

  5. 5 Here we take up a suggestion made by Cordelia Fine at the Critical Neuroscience workshop in July 2008 at McGill University, Montreal and Usha Goswami (2006).

  6. 6 The first course on Critical Neuroscience was held at the Cognitive Science Institute of the University of Osnabrück and a new one has begun at the Department of Philosophy at the University of Marburg, in Germany. The aim is that the curriculum materials can be used to form a blueprint for further courses addressing the agenda of Critical Neuroscience.

  7. 7 See: www.noliemri.com/ and www.cephoscorp.com/ The quote is from: frd.musc.edu/cephos.html

References

  • Alder K. (2007). The lie detectors: The history of an American obsession. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arai A.C., & Kessler M. (2007). Pharmacology of ampakine modulators: from AMPA receptors to synapses and behavior. Current Drug Targets, 8(5), 583–602.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bartels A., & Zeki S. (2000). The neural basis of romantic love. NeuroReport, 1(17), 3829–3834.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bartels A., & Zeki S. (2004). The neural correlates of maternal and romantic love. NeuroImage, 21, 1155–1166.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beaulieu A. (2002). Images are not the (only) truth: Brain mapping, visual knowledge, and iconoclasm. Science, Technology, & Human Values, 27(1), 53–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bhugra D., & Littlewood R. (Eds) (2001). Colonialism and Psychiatry. New Delhi: Oxford UP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Borck C., & Hagner M. (2001). Mindful practices: On the neurosciences in the twentieth century. Science in Context, 14(4), 615–641.

    Google Scholar 

  • Braun L., Fausto-Sterling A., Fullwiley D., Hammonds E.M., Nelson A., Quivers W. et al. (2007). Racial categories in medical practice: how useful are they? PLoS Medicine, 4(9), e271.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cacioppo J.T., Berntson G.G., Lorig T.S., Norris C.J., Rickett E., & Nussbaum H. (2003). Just because you're imaging the brain doesn't mean you can stop using your head: A primer and set of first principles. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 85, 650–661.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caldwell J.A. Jr, Caldwell J.L., Smythe N.K., & Hall K.K. (2000). A double-blind placebo-controlled investigation of the efficacy of modafinil for sustaining the alertness and performance of aviators: A helicopter simulator study. Psychopharmacology, 150, 272–282.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chiao J.Y., Iidaka T., Gordon H.L., Nogawa J., Bar M., Aminoff E. et al. (2008). Cultural specificity in amygdala response to fear faces. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 20(12), 2167–2174.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohn S. (2008). From mental illness to biological fact: patients’ responses to neuroscience promises. Paper presented at Critical Neuroscience workshop, McGill University, Montreal, 15–16 July.

  • Coltheart M. (2006). What has functional neuroimaging told us about the mind (so far)? Cortex, 42, 323–331.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dalgleish T. (2004). The emotional brain. Nature Reviews: Neuroscience, 5, 583–589.

    Google Scholar 

  • Damasio A.R. (1999). The feeling of what happens: Body and emotion in the making of consciousness. New York: Harcourt Brace.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daston L. (2000). Biographies of scientific objects. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daston L., & Galison P. (2007). Objectivity. Brooklyn, NY: Zone Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davidson R.J. (2001). Toward a biology of personality and emotion. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 935, 191–207.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doidge N. (2007). The brain that changes itself: Stories of personal triumph from the frontiers of brain science. New York: Viking.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dumit J. (2004). Picturing personhood: Brain scans and biomedical identity. Princeton, NJ: Princeton UP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eagleman D.M. (2008). Neuroscience and the law. Houston Lawyer, 16(6), 36–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eastman N. & Campbell C. (2006). Neuroscience and legal determination of criminal responsibility. Nature Reviews: Neuroscience, 7(4), 311–318.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elliott C. (2003). Better than well: American medicine meets the American dream. New York: Norton.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fleck L. (1981 [1935]). Genesis and development of a scientific fact. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Foucault M. (1973). Madness and civilization: A history of insanity in the age of reason. New York: Vintage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frith C.D. (2008). Social cognition. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 363, 2033–2039.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frith U., & Frith C.D. (2003). Development and neurophysiology of mentalizing. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 358, 459–473.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fukuyama F. (2002). Our posthuman future: Consequences of the biotechnology revolution. New York: Farrar, Straus & Giroux.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geuss R. (1981). The idea of a critical theory. Cambridge: Cambridge UP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gold I., & Stoljar D. (1999). A neuron doctrine in the philosophy of neuroscience. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 809–830.

    Google Scholar 

  • Greenslit N. (2002). Pharmaceutical branding: Identity, individuality, and illness. Molecular Interventions, 2, 342–345.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goswami U. (2006). Neuroscience and education: From research to practice? Nature Reviews: Neuroscience, 7(5), 406–411.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hacking I. (1992). The self-vindication of the laboratory. In Pickering A. (Ed.), Science as practice and culture, 343–368. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hacking I. (1995). The looping effect of human kinds. In Sperber D., Premack D. and Premack A. (Eds), Causal cognition: An multidisciplinary approach, 351–83. Oxford: Oxford UP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hacking I. (2002). Historical ontology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard UP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Han S., & Northoff G. (2008). Culture-sensitive neural substrates of human cognition: A transcultural neuroimaging approach. Nature Reviews: Neuroscience, 9(8), 646–654.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harmer C.J., Shelley N.C., Cowen P.J., & Goodwin G. (2004). Increased positive versus negative affective perception and memory in healthy volunteers following selective serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibition. American Journal of Psychiatry, 161, 1256–1263.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartmann M. (2009). Against first nature: Critical theory and neuroscience. Critical Neuroscience workshop, UCLA, Los Angeles, 28–29 January.

  • Healy D. (2004). Let them eat Prozac: The unhealthy relationship between the pharmaceutical industry and depression. New York: New York UP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Honneth A. (1986). Kritik der Macht: Reflexionsstufen einer kritischen Gesellschaftstheorie. Frankfurt/M.: Suhrkamp; English trans.: The critique of power: Reflexive stages in a critical social theory. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  • Honneth A. (2007). Pathologien der Vernunft. Frankfurt/M.: Suhrkamp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horwitz A.V., & Wakefield J. (2007). The loss of sadness: How psychiatry transformed normal sorrow into depressive disorder. New York: Oxford UP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hunt-Grubbe C. (2007). The elementary DNA of Dr Watson, Times Online, 14 October, URL (accessed March 2009): entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/tol/arts_and_entertainment/books/article2630748.ece

  • Hyman S. (2007). Can neuroscience be integrated into the DSM V? Nature Reviews: Neuroscience, 8, 725–732.

    Google Scholar 

  • Illich I. (1976). Medical nemesis. London: Calder & Boyars.

    Google Scholar 

  • Illes J. (Ed.). (2006). Neuroethics: Defining the issues in theory, practice and policy. Oxford: Oxford UP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Illes J., Kann D., Karetsky K., Letourneau P., Raffin T.A., Schraedley-Desmond P. et al. (2004). Advertising, patient decision making, and self-referral for computed tomographic and magnetic resonance imaging. Archives of Internal Medicine, 164, 2415–2419.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ingvar M., Ambros-Ingerson J., Davis M., Granger R., Kessler M., Rogers G.A. et al. (1997). Enhancement by an ampakine of memory encoding in humans. Experimental Neurology, 146, 553–559.

    Google Scholar 

  • Insel T.R. & Quirion R. (2005). Psychiatry as a clinical neuroscience discipline. Journal of the American Medical Association, 294, 2221–2224.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joyce K. (2008). Magnetic appeal: MRI and the myth of transparency. Ithaca, NY: Cornell UP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirmayer L.J. (2006). Beyond the ‘new cross-cultural psychiatry’: Cultural biology, discursive psychology and the ironies of globalization. Transcultural Psychiatry, 43, 126–144.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirsch P., Esslinger C., Chen Q., Mier D., Lis S., Siddhanti S., Gruppe H. et al. (2005). Oxytocin modulates neural circuitry for social cognition and fear in humans. Journal of Neuroscience, 25, 11489–11493.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kleinman A. (1977). Depression, somatization, and the new cross-cultural psychiatry. Social Science & Medicine, 11, 3–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kosfeld M., Heinrichs M., Zak P.J., Fischbacher U., & Fehr E. (2005). Oxytocin increases trust in humans. Nature, 435, 673–676.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kramer P.D. (1993). Listening to Prozac: The landmark book about antidepressants and the remaking of the self. New York: Penguin Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krueger F., Grafman J., & McCabe K. (2008). Neural correlates of economic game playing. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 363 (1511), 3859–3874.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kulynych J. (1997). Psychiatric neuroimaging evidence: A high-tech crystal ball? Stanford Law Review, 49, 1249–1270.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lacasse J.R., & Leo J. (2005). Serotonin and depression: A disconnect between the advertisements and the scientific literature. PLoS Medicine, 2(12), 1211–1216.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lamm C., Batson C.D., & Decety J. (2007). The neural substrate of human empathy: Effects of perspective-taking and cognitive appraisal. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 19, 42–58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lane C. (2007). Shyness: How normal behavior became a sickness. New Haven, CT: Yale UP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Logothetis N.K. (2008). What we can do and cannot do with fMRI. Nature, 453(7197), 869–878.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marcus S.J. (Ed.) (2002). Neuroethics: Mapping the field. New York: Dana Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin E. (2000). Mind–body problems. American Ethnologist, 27, 569–590.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mather G. (2006). Foundations of perception. Hove, UK: Psychology Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCabe S.E., Knight J.R., Teter C.J., & Wechsler H. (2005). Non-medical use of prescription stimulants among US college students: Prevalence and correlates from a national survey. Addiction, 100, 96–106.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCulloch J. (1995). Colonial psychiatry and ‘the African mind’. Cambridge: Cambridge UP.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGoey L. (2008). Prozac, RCTs and the profitability of uncertainty and failure. Invited talk at the ENSN-Department for History and Philosophy of Science workshop, ‘Our Brains, our Selves?’, Harvard University, 1–3 May.

  • Mintzes B., Barer M.L., Kravitz R.L., Bassett K., Lexchin J., Kazanjian A. et al. (2003). How does direct-to-consumer advertising (DTCA) affect prescribing? A survey in primary care environments with and without legal DTCA. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 169, 405–412.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moll J., De Oliveira-Souza R., & Zahn R. (2008). The neural basis of moral cognition: Sentiments, concepts, and values. Annals of the New York Academy of Science, 1124, 161–180.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moreno J.D. (2007). Neuroscience and national security mind wars: Brain research and national defense. Washington, DC: Dana Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moriarty J.D. (2008). Flickering admissibility: neuroimaging evidence in the U.S. courts. Journal of Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 26, 29–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nagel S.K. (2008). Ethics and the neurosciences: The ethical and social implications of monitoring and manipulating the brain. Doctoral thesis, University of Osnabrück.

  • Nature (2007). ‘Mind games: How not to mix politics and science’. Nature 450(457), 22 November, URL (accessed March 2009): www.nature.com/nature/journal/v450/n7169/full/450457a.html

  • Ortega F., & Vidal F. (2007). Mapping the cerebral subject in contemporary culture. Reciis - Electronic Journal of Communication Information & Innovation in Health, 1, 255–259.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parens E. (Ed.) (1998). Enhancing human traits: Ethical and social implications. Washington, DC: Georgetown UP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Patel N. (2003). Human rights and clinical psychology: Reinforcing inequalities or facilitating empowerment? International Journal of Human Rights, 7, 16–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parker A., Derrington A., & Blakemore C. (2002). The physiology of cognitive processes. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 357, 959–961.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pfaff D.W. (2007). The neuroscience of fair play: Why we (usually) follow the golden rule. Foreword by Edward O. Wilson . Washington, DC: Distributed for Dana Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • President's Council on Bioethics. (2003). Beyond therapy: Biotechnology and the pursuit of happiness. Washington, DC, URL (accessed September 2008): www.bioethics.gov/reports/beyondtherapy/index.html

  • Rapoport J.L., & Inoff-Germain G. (2002). Responses to methylphenidate in Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder and normal children: Update 2002. Journal of Attention Disorders, 6 Suppl. 1, S57–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rees D., & Rose S. (2004). New brain sciences: Perils and prospects. Cambridge: Cambridge UP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rose N. (2006). The politics of life itself: Biomedicine, power, and subjectivity in the twenty-first century. Princeton, NJ: Princeton UP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosen J. (2007). The brain on the stand. New York Times, 11 March.

  • Rosenthal M.B., Berndt E.R., Donohue J.M., Frank R.G., & Epstein A.M. (2002). Promotion of prescription drugs to consumers. New England Journal of Medicine, 346, 498–505.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roskies A. (2007). Are neuroimages like photographs of the brain? Philosophy of Science, 74, 860–872.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rouse J. (1996). Engaging science: How to understand its practices philosophically. Ithaca, NY: Cornell UP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rouse J. (2002). How scientific practices matter. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Seligman R., & Kirmayer L.J. (2008). Dissociative experience and cultural neuroscience: Narrative, metaphor and mechanism. Culture, Medicine & Psychiatry, 32, 31–64.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singh I. (2005). Will the ‘real boy’ please behave: Dosing dilemmas for parents of boys with ADHD. American Journal of Bioethics, 5(3), 34–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singh I. (2008). Beyond polemics: Science and ethics of ADHD. Nature Reviews: Neuroscience, 9, 957–964.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skolnick Weisberg D., Keil F.C., Goodstein J., Rawson E., & Gray J. (2008). The seductive allure of neuroscience explanations. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 20, 470–477.

    Google Scholar 

  • Solms M., & Lechevalier B. (2002). Neurosciences and psychoanalysis. International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 83, 233–237.

    Google Scholar 

  • Toga A.W., Thompson P.M., & Sowell E.R. (2006). Mapping brain maturation. Trends in Neurosciences, 29, 148–159.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner D.C., Clark L., Dowson J., Robbins T.W., & Sahakian B.J. (2004). Modafinil improves cognition and response inhibition in adult attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Biological Psychiatry, 55, 1031–1040.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Orden G.C., & Paap K.R. (1997). Functional neuroimages fail to discover pieces of mind in the parts of the brain. Philosophy of Science, 64, 85–94.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vidal F. (2002). Brains, bodies, selves, and science: Anthropologies of identity and the resurrection of the body. Critical Inquiry, 28, 930–947.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vidal F. (2009). Brainhood, anthropological figure of modernity. History of the Human Sciences, 22: 5–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vohs K.D., & Schooler J.W. (2008). The value of believing in free will: Encouraging a belief in determinism increases cheating. Psychological Science, 19, 49–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vul E., Harris C., Winkielman P., & Pashler H. (2009). Voodoo correlations in social neuroscience. Perspectives on Psychological Science.

  • Wezenberg E., Verkes R.J., Ruigt G.S., Hulstijn W., & Sabbe B.G. (2006). Acute effects of the ampakine farampator on memory and information processing in healthy elderly volunteers. Neuropsychopharmacology, 32, 1272–1283,

    Google Scholar 

  • Wall J.T., Xu J., & Wang X. (2002). Human brain plasticity: An emerging view of the multiple substrates and mechanisms that cause cortical changes and related sensory dysfunctions after injuries of sensory inputs from the body. Brain Research Reviews, 39, 181–215.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wexler B.E. (2006). Brain and culture: Neurobiology, ideology and social change. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wise N.M. (2006). Thoughts on the politicization through commercialization of science. Social Research, 73, 1253–1272.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wolf S.M. (2008). Neurolaw: The big question. American Journal of Bioethics, 8, 21–36.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wolfe J., Kluender K., Levi D., Bartoshuk L., Herz R., Klatzky R. et al. (2006). Sensation and perception. Sunderland, MA: Sinauer Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wolpe P.R. (2002). Treatment, enhancement and the ethics of neurotherapeutics. Brain and Cognition, 50, 387–395.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yang Y., & Raine A. (2008). Brain abnormalities in antisocial individuals: Implications for the Law. Journal of Behavioral Science and the Law, 26, 65–83.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yesavage J.A., Mumenthaler M.S., Taylor J.L., Friedman L., O'Hara R., Sheikh J. et al. (2002). Donepezil and flight simulator performance: Effects on retention of complex skills. Neurology, 59, 123–125.

    Google Scholar 

  • Young A. (1995). The harmony of illusions: Inventing post-traumatic stress disorder. Princeton, NJ: Princeton UP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zak P.J., Stanton A.A., & Ahmadi S. (2007). Oxytocin increases generosity in humans. PLoS ONE, 2, e1128.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zeki S., & Romaya J.P. (2008). Neural correlates of hate. PLoS ONE, 3, e3556.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhu Y., Zhang L., Fan J., & Han S. (2007). Neural basis of cultural influence on self-representation. Neuroimage, 43, 1310–1316.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This text is the result of collaborative work as part of the interdisciplinary project ‘Neuroscience in Context’, funded by the German Volkswagen Foundation within the Initiative ‘European Platform for Life Sciences, Mind Sciences, and the Humanities’ (see www.nic-online.eu). We thank the participants of the Critical Neuroscience workshop at McGill University and the audience of the philosophy staff colloquium at the University of Osnabrück for many helpful suggestions in developing the agenda of the project. We are grateful to Peggy DesAutels, Lutz Fricke, Alessandra Miklavcic, Robert C. Richardson and Fernando Vidal for useful comments on earlier versions of the article, and we thank Ian Gold for helpful discussion and suggestions along the way.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Max Planck Institute for the History of Science, 22 Boltzmannstrasse, Dahlem, D-14195, Berlin, Germany

    Suparna Choudhury

  2. University of Osnabrück, Institute of Cognitive Science, Albrechtstrasse 28, Osnabrück, D-49076, Germany

    Saskia Kathi Nagel

  3. Philipps-University Marburg, Institute of Philosophy, Wilhelm-Röpke-Str 6b, Marburg, D-35032, Germany

    Jan Slaby

Authors
  1. Suparna Choudhury
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Saskia Kathi Nagel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jan Slaby
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jan Slaby.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Choudhury, S., Nagel, S. & Slaby, J. Critical Neuroscience: Linking Neuroscience and Society through Critical Practice. BioSocieties 4, 61–77 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1017/S1745855209006437

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S1745855209006437

Keywords

Search

Navigation