Matheus Diesel Werberich

selected publications

1. Top-down and bottom-up constraints in mechanistic inquiry

   Matheus Diesel Werberich

   Abs Bib PDF Website

   Mechanisms play a crucial role in scientific research across various disciplines, and philosophers of science have devoted significant effort into understanding their ontology and epistemology. This paper examines the relationship between mechanisms and phenomena, highlighting the inherent dependence of mechanistic delineation on the characterization of phenomena. By acknowledging that characterizing phenomena is influenced by pragmatic considerations and research interests, the paper argues that mechanistic inquiry is inherently shaped by researchers’ perspectives. This dependence raises concerns about the possibility of a realist view of mechanisms. To address these concerns, the paper explores how top-down constraints, rooted in researchers’ interests and pragmatic concerns, can be balanced by bottom-up constraints derived from empirical considerations. In conclusion, I argue that the interplay between these constraints forms an empirical and realist counterweight to the perspectival nature of top-down constraints.

   @article{Werberich2023,
     author = {Werberich, Matheus Diesel},
     journaltitle = {Controversia (Unisinos)},
     number = {3},
     title = {Top-down and bottom-up constraints in mechanistic inquiry},
     volume = {19},
     date = {2023},
     pages = {87 - 106},
   }

2. A Metacognitive Approach to Memory Markers

   Matheus Diesel Werberich

   Abs Bib PDF Website

   Given both the phenomenological and cognitive similarities between episodic memory and imagination, it’s difficult to say how we can reliably distinguish them at their moment of retrieval. Several memory markers have thus been proposed, which are characteristics that would reliably indicate to the subject that her mental state is an instance of memory. While the question of what exactly constitutes these memory markers is still an issue to be settled, there is also the more general question of whether they can be reliable at all. In the present paper, I have identified two theses about the latter issue (the reliability and unreliability theses) and have argued that the main cause of disagreement between them lies on their different assumptions on how beliefs about our own mental states are formed, i.e. what are the underlying metacognitive mechanisms responsible for self-attribution of mental states. These different views on metacognition were then further investigated with regards to their use of metarepresentations and their general agreement with recent cognitive psychology research. These analyses corroborate the reliability of certain kinds of memory markers in distinguishing between memory and imagination.

   @article{Werberich2020,
     title = {A {{Metacognitive Approach}} to {{Memory Markers}}},
     author = {Werberich, Matheus Diesel},
     date = {2020},
     journaltitle = {Aporia},
     volume = {XX},
     pages = {19--30},
   }