PhilArchive
open access
Response to Commentaries
The authors respond to a wide range of objections defending our argument that some forms of behaviour modification utilising advances in the cognitive sciences are desirable and need not necessarily undermine autonomy or freedom.
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- Critical 4E Cognitive Science#78154
- A Costly Co-Pilot? AI Usage Signals Reduced Morality via Effort Perceptions#413014
- Stop me if you've heard this one before: The Chomskyan hammer and the Skinnerian nail#88329
- Scientific Progress, Understanding, and Knowledge: Reply to Park#719280
- Autonomy, taking one's choices to be good, and practical law: Replies to critics#762662
Record · ID 765677
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive