Function and teleology can be naturalized either by reference to systems with a particular type of organization or by reference to a particular kind of history. As functions are generally ascribed to states or traits according to their current role and regardless of their origin, etiological accounts are inappropriate. Here, I offer a systems-theoretical interpretation as a new version of an organizational account of functionality, which is more comprehensive than traditional cybernetic views and provides explicit criteria for empirically testable function (...) ascriptions. I propose, that functional states, traits or items are those components of a complex system, which are under certain circumstances necessary for their self-re-production. I show, how this notion can be applied in intra- and trans-generational function ascriptions in biology, how it can deal with the problems of multifunctionality and functional equivalents, and how it relates to concepts like fitness and adaptation. Finally, I argue that most intentional explanations can be treated as functional explanations. (shrink)

Two embryonic tissues—the neural crest and the cranial placodes—give rise to most evolutionary novelties of the vertebrate head. These two tissues develop similarly in several respects: they originate from ectoderm at the neural plate border, give rise to migratory cells and develop into multiple cell fates including sensory neurons. These similarities, and the joint appearance of both tissues in the vertebrate lineage, may point to a common evolutionary origin of neural crest and placodes from a specialized population of neural plate (...) border cells. However, a review of the developmental mechanisms underlying the induction, specification, migration and cytodifferentiation of neural crest and placodes reveals fundamental differences between the tissues. Taken together with insights from recent studies in tunicates and amphioxus, this suggests that neural crest and placodes have an independent evolutionary origin and that they evolved from the neural and non‐neural side of the neural plate border, respectively. BioEssays 30:659–672, 2008. © 2008 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. (shrink)

Der erste Teil dieses Buches zeichnet die wissenschaftstheoretischen Auseinandersetzungen um den Reduktionismus ausgehend von den Positionen des Wiener Kreises bis heute nach, wobei sich das reduktionistische Programm als undurchführbar erweist. Wie kann aber der Einheit der Welt Rechnung getragen werden, wenn eine Fülle von Disziplinen scheinbar beziehungslos nebeneinanderstehen? Diese Frage versucht der zweite Teil mit der Grundlegung einer Allgemeinen Systemtheorie zu beantworten. Mit der Einführung eines allgemeinen Systembegriffs können Brücken zwischen den Disziplinen geschlagen werden, ohne die Existenzberechtigung verschiedener Disziplinen in (...) Frage zu stellen. (shrink)

This paper proposes and defends an account of what it is to act for reasons. In the first part, I will discuss the desire-belief and the deliberative model of acting for reasons. I will argue that we can avoid the weaknesses and retain the strengths of both views, if we pursue an alternative according to which acting for reasons involves taking something as a reason. In the main part, I will develop an account of what it is to take something (...) as a reason for action. On the basis of this, I will then offer a new account of what it is to act for reasons. (shrink)

According to the standard view in philosophy, intentionality is the mark of genuine action. In psychology, human cognition and agency are now widely explained in terms of the workings of two distinct systems (or types of processes), and intentionality is not a central notion in this dual-system theory. Further, it is often claimed, in psychology, that most human actions are automatic, rather than consciously controlled. This raises pressing questions. Does the dual-system theory preserve the philosophical account of intentional action? How (...) much of our behavior is intentional according to this view? And what is the role of consciousness? I will propose here a revised account of intentional action within the dual-system framework, and we will see that most of our behavior can qualify as intentional, even if most of it is automatic. An important lesson will be that philosophical accounts of intentional action need to pay more attention to the role of consciousness in action. (shrink)

Like all causal theories in philosophy, the causal theory of action is plagued by the problem of deviant causal chains. I have proposed a solution on the basis of the assumption that mental states and events are causally efficacious in virtue of their contents. This solution has been questioned by Torbjörn Tännsjö (2009). First, I will reply to the objection, and then I will discuss Tännsjö’s alternative.

The causal theory of action has been the standard view in the philosophy of action and mind. In this chapter, I will present responses to two challenges to the theory. The first says, basically, that there is no positive argument in favour of the causal theory, as the only reason that supports it consists in the apparent lack of tenable alternatives. The second challenge says that the theory fails to capture the phenomenon of agency, as it reduces activity to mere (...) happenings (events and event-causal processes). This is often referred to as the problem of "disappearing agency". My main aim is to show that there is no problem of disappearing agency, and we will see that my response to the first challenge will be conducive to this end. I will present a positive argument for the causal theory on the basis of considerations concerning the metaphysics of agency, and I will suggest that we "own" the agency that springs from our mental states and events "by default". (shrink)

Benjamin Libet's empirical challenge to free will has received a great deal of attention and criticism. A standard line of response has emerged that many take to be decisive against Libet's challenge. In the first part of this paper, I will argue that this standard response fails to put the challenge to rest. It fails, in particular, to address a recent follow-up experiment that raises a similar worry about free will (Soon, Brass, Heinze, & Haynes, 2008). In the second part, (...) however, I will argue that we can altogether avoid Libet-style challenges if we adopt a traditional compatibilist account of free will. In the final section, I will briefly explain why there is good and independent reason to think about free will in this way. (shrink)

1. T. Entwicklung bis 1971 -- 2. T. Entwicklung von 1972 bis 1980.

According to radical versions of embodied cognition, human cognition and agency should be explained without the ascription of representational mental states. According to a standard reply, accounts of embodied cognition can explain only instances of cognition and agency that are not “representation-hungry”. Two main types of such representation-hungry phenomena have been discussed: cognition about “the absent” and about “the abstract”. Proponents of representationalism have maintained that a satisfactory account of such phenomena requires the ascription of mental representations. Opponents have denied (...) this. I will argue that there is another important representation-hungry phenomenon that has been overlooked in this debate: temporally extended planning agency. In particular, I will argue that it is very difficult to see how planning agency can be explained without the ascription of mental representations, even if we grant, for the sake of argument, that cognition about the absent and abstract can. We will see that this is a serious challenge for the radical as well as the more modest anti-representationalist versions of embodied cognition, and we will see that modest anti-representationalism is an unstable position. (shrink)

Libertarianism appears to be incoherent, because free will appears to be incompatible with indeterminism. In support of this claim, van Inwagen offered an argument that is now known as the “rollback argument”. In a recent reply, Lara Buchak has argued that the underlying thought experiment fails to support the first of two key premises. On her view, this points to an unexplored alternative in the free will debate, which she calls “chance-incompatibilism”. I will argue that the rollback thought experiment does (...) support the second key premise of the argument, and, more importantly, that libertarianism is committed to the first premise for independent reasons concerning the relationship between the normative and causal strength of the agent’s reasons. The upshot will be that chance-incompatibilism is not a promising new alternative in the free will debate, and we will see that the debate around those issues can benefit from more attention to the role of the agent’s reasons for action. (shrink)

The conditional analysis of dispositions is widely rejected, mainly due to counterexamples in which dispositions are either “finkish” or “masked.” David Lewis proposed a reformed conditional analysis. This view avoids the problem of finkish dispositions, but it fails to solve the problem of masking. I will propose a reformulation of Lewis’ analysis, and I will argue that this reformulation can easily be modified so that it avoids the problem of masking. In the final section, I will address the challenge that (...) some dispositions appear to lack any stimulus condition, and I will briefly turn to the issue of reductionism. (shrink)

COVID-19 has revealed that science needs to learn how to better deal with the irreducible uncertainty that comes with global systemic risks as well as with the social responsibility of science towards the public good. Further developing the epistemological principles of new theories and experimental practices, alternative investigative pathways and communication, and diverse voices can be an important contribution of history and philosophy of science and of science studies to ongoing transformations of the scientific enterprise.

In dialogue with the most famous myth for the origin of different languages - The Tower of Babel - A Psychoanalytic Exploration on Sameness and Otherness: Beyond Babel provides a series of timely reflections on the themes of sameness and otherness from a contemporary psychoanalytic perspective. How are we dealing with communication and its difficulties, the confusion of tongues and loss of common ground within a European context today? Can we move beyond Babel? Confusion and feared loss of shared values (...) and identity are a major part of the daily work of psychoanalytic psychotherapists. Bringing together an international range psychoanalytic practitioners and researchers, the book is divided into six parts and covers an array of resonant topics, including: language and translation; cultural identity; families and children; the cyber world; the psychotherapeutic process; and migration. Whereas the quest for unity, which underpins the myth of Babel, leads to mystification, simplification and the exclusion of people or things, multilingual communities necessitate mutual understanding through dialogue. This book examines those factors which further or threaten communication, aiming not to reduce but to gain complexity. It suggests that diversification enriches communication and that, by relating to others, we can create something new. As opposed to cultural and linguistic homogeneity, Babel is not only a metaphor for mangled communication, alienation, and distraction, it is also about the acceptance or rejection of differences between self and other. This book will be of great interest to psychoanalytic psychotherapists and researchers from a wide variety of backgrounds. (shrink)

A new approach to Hume's problem of induction that justifies the optimality of induction at the level of meta-induction. Hume's problem of justifying induction has been among epistemology's greatest challenges for centuries. In this book, Gerhard Schurz proposes a new approach to Hume's problem. Acknowledging the force of Hume's arguments against the possibility of a noncircular justification of the reliability of induction, Schurz demonstrates instead the possibility of a noncircular justification of the optimality of induction, or, more precisely, of (...) meta-induction (the application of induction to competing prediction models). Drawing on discoveries in computational learning theory, Schurz demonstrates that a regret-based learning strategy, attractivity-weighted meta-induction, is predictively optimal in all possible worlds among all prediction methods accessible to the epistemic agent. Moreover, the a priori justification of meta-induction generates a noncircular a posteriori justification of object induction. Taken together, these two results provide a noncircular solution to Hume's problem. Schurz discusses the philosophical debate on the problem of induction, addressing all major attempts at a solution to Hume's problem and describing their shortcomings; presents a series of theorems, accompanied by a description of computer simulations illustrating the content of these theorems (with proofs presented in a mathematical appendix); and defends, refines, and applies core insights regarding the optimality of meta-induction, explaining applications in neighboring disciplines including forecasting sciences, cognitive science, social epistemology, and generalized evolution theory. Finally, Schurz generalizes the method of optimality-based justification to a new strategy of justification in epistemology, arguing that optimality justifications can avoid the problems of justificatory circularity and regress. (shrink)

During a conference entitled “Un logicien consciencieux. La philosophie de Evert Willem Beth,” held in Nancy in 1998 and published in this journal, volume 3, cahier 4 [Barth, Heinzmann et al. 1998-1999], the participants regretted that a reasoned biography of Beth was not available. In view of the efforts made since then in this direction, in particular by Paul van Ulsen in his PhD thesis in Dutch [2000], this article attempts to provide an overview of Beth’s work for a broader (...) community of philosophers of science. However, my focus is not so much on Beth’s widely discussed and important contributions to mathematical logic, where his most creative merits reside. My aim is to emphasize Beth’s philosophical and cultural background. Both are also discussed in the first two chapters of Ulsen’s thesis, which globally focuses on Beth’s work in logic. Of course, philosophical and scientific aspects cannot be systematically separated, but Beth’s influence on the philosophy of mathematics between the 1950s and 1960s seems to me large enough to highlight it here. Beth is one of the very few philosophers who also presented highly technically relevant results in logic, or one of the few logicians who also wrote philosophical papers, not only in his youth or old age, but throughout his career. In his 741-page magnum opus The Foundations of Mathematics [1959], he combines the treatment of philosophical and logico-mathematical problems under the perspective that the traditional deductive procedure is an essential and not merely incidental element in mathematical proof so that “logic must play the principal role in a philosophical examination of mathematical thought” [1959, XI]. By 1937, Beth was “convinced that the only possibility of founding mathematics in a truly satisfactory way is to apply intuitive and formal methods simultaneously in such a way that they can control and verify each other” (“L’évidence intuitive dans les mathématiques modernes” [1937, 165]). In 1956, he still justified the emphasis on the intuitive element of proof by “certain complications that the development of these [formalist] tendencies would later give rise to” (“Poincaré et la philosophie” [1956b, 238, transl. G. H.]). (shrink)

Gerhard Preyer rekonstruiert in diesem essential den harten Kern von Shmuel N. Eisenstadts allgemeiner Soziologie, wie Eisenstadt sie in der Untersuchung der Beziehung zwischen Handeln (Kreativität) und Struktur sowie zwischen Kultur und Sozialstruktur durchgeführt hat. Preyer ordnet seine Untersuchung in dem von ihm sogenannten „semantischen Map“ als eine evolutionäre Universalie des „konstitutiven basalen Bezugsrahmens“ der Erforschung der sozio-strukturellen Evolution an. Aus Eisenstadts Sicht legen die grundlegenden semantischen Maps das zentrale Problem der menschlichen und der sozialen Existenz, die Spezifikation ihrer (...) Lösungen und die Beziehung zu den grundlegenden Annahmen über die soziale Ordnung fest. Das Semantic Map und der Kampf um die Verteilung von Ressourcen ist der forschungsprogrammatische Bezugsrahmen seiner Reformulierung der Modernisierungstheorie, der Kritik an der klassischen Modernisierungstheorie als einer Konvergenztheorie und seiner Fassung des Problems der sozialen Ordnung. Die Studie wird mit einer Modifikation von Eisenstadts Ansatz einer mitgliedschaftstheoretischen Reinterpretation abgeschlossen. (shrink)

Inheriting Benjamin otherwise -- Erbsünde: a note on paradoxical inheritance in Benjamin's Kafka essay -- Benjamin's blotting paper: writing and erasing a theological figure of thought -- Critique and the thing: Benjamin and Heidegger -- The work of art and its formal and genealogical determinations: Benjamin's cool place between Kant and Nietzsche -- Going with time: a miniature on time and photography after Benjamin.

Alle Ideologie beruht auf Verdrängung der Gewalt; noch dort, wo sie Gewalt fetischisiert, bildet der blinde Fleck des Souveräns den Ursprung. Denn ausgeblendet wird ja nicht Gewalt als solche, sondern dass durch sie die Einheit der Gesellschaft erst Bestand hat. An diesem blinden Fleck tritt im Politischen selbst zutage, wie Aufklärung sich weigert, ihre eigenen Bedingungen zu begreifen – darin ist sie zunächst nichts anderes als die frühe Gestalt des Engagements. In dieser ›Dialektik des Leviathan‹, wie sie der erste Teil (...) des Buchs im Anschluss an die Dialektik der Aufklärung zu umreißen versucht, erhält die Gegenüberstellung von Hobbes und Spinoza eine Schlüsselrolle. Die These lautet, dass ein kritischer Begriff des Staats ohne die Kritik der spinozistischen Auffassung von Substanz nicht zu haben sei, deren problematische Aspekte nicht zufällig in der französischen (und italienischen) Linken (Althusser, Deleuze, Negri…) wiederkehrten. Umgekehrt war es gerade die Problematik dieses Substanzbegriffs, die es Marx erst ermöglichte – zusammen mit der Hegelschen Dialektik und zugleich gegen sie gerichtet – die Kritik der politischen Ökonomie zu entfalten. Wenn die neueste Ideologie der Linken wie der Rechten, in Frankreich wie in Deutschland, vielfach das Heideggersche »Sein« und den Carl Schmitt’schen »Begriff des Politischen« an die Stelle von Substanz und Souveränität setzt (Agamben, Badiou, Mouffe…), ist es mit jener ›Dialektik des Politischen‹ auf dem Boden der klassischen Metaphysik und Aufklärung nicht mehr getan. Dem heutigen Triumph Heideggers und Schmitts zu widersprechen, geht es im zweiten Teil des Buchs: Jean-Paul Sartres »Engagement gegen den Tod« und Jean Amérys Appell, den Leib zu »substantiieren« (wie das Manfred Dahlmann jüngst ausgedrückt hat), bedeuten einerseits Annäherung an die entscheidenden Fragen einer Philosophie nach Auschwitz – gerade auch, was die Frage des Souveräns betrifft. Andererseits verkehrte sich bei beiden regelmäßig die kritische Intention, sobald man den Gegenstand des Engagements mit der politischen Linken teilen und also Politik machen wollte. Dass sie vielmehr zu sabotieren sei, hat allerdings Améry – ohne sich dessen unbedingt bewusst zu sein – in seiner Parteinahme für Israel vorgeführt wie kaum ein anderer. Der von Adorno formulierte kategorische Imperativ, der zugleich das Politische als »Stand der Unfreiheit« begreift, erweist sich als die einzige Möglichkeit, dieser Sabotage auf den Grund zu gehen. Hier spannt sich aber auch der Bogen zum ersten Teil des Buchs zurück: Aus der Kritik an Spinozas Substanzbegriff lässt sich keine Kritik an Heideggers Sein zum Tode entwickeln, so wie auch der Gegensatz zwischen der Vernunft als Selbsterhaltung, die in der Dialektik der Aufklärung kritisiert wird, und der Vernichtung um der Vernichtung willen, die das Selbstopfer einschließt, dialektischer Vermittlung nicht mehr zugänglich ist, sondern zur Intervention nötigt. Davon legt jener Imperativ Zeugnis ab. Nur wer sich dabei jedoch die eigene Ohnmacht immer wieder eingesteht, die im notwendigen Engagement gegen den Antisemitismus so fatal wie nirgendwo hervortritt – spätestens dann, wenn der eben erst bezwungene Antisemit in neuer Gestalt wiederaufersteht –, wird auch die antisemitische bzw. antizionistische Gewalt nicht unterschätzen. (Diese Unterschätzung ist das Merkmal aller liberalen Anstrengungen, die Antisemiten zurückzudrängen.) Der dritte Teil schließlich versammelt – in Anlehnung an Adornos Engagement-Essay – Einzelstudien zur Kritik des politischen Engagements, wie sie sich an und in den Werken von Literatur und Essay, Musik und Film erschließt (Thomas Bernhard, Berthold Brecht, Hanns Eisler, Jean-Luc Godard, Elfriede Jelinek, Imre Kertész, Claude Lanzmann, Georg Lukács…). (shrink)

Max Weber ist ein Klassiker der Kultur- und Sozialwissenschaften. Sein Werk gehört weltweit zum Kernbestand von Forschung und Lehre, und dies gilt besonders für seine methodologischen Schriften, denen auch 100 Jahre nach ihrer Publikation nachhaltige Aufmerksamkeit beschieden ist. Allerdings gibt es immer noch kein einvernehmliches Verständnis von Webers Position. Der Grund dafür liegt in der mangelnden Aufarbeitung der Quellen. Viele wichtige Autoren, deren Werke Weber rezipierte, sind in Vergessenheit geraten. Sie in Erinnerung zu rufen, ist dringend notwendig, um seine Wissenschaftslehre (...) in ihrer ganzen Komplexität zu verstehen. 0Das vorliegende Sammelwerk leistet einen Beitrag zur Schließung dieser Forschungslücke. Es rekonstruiert den Denkraum des späten 19. und frühen 20. Jahrhunderts, in dem sich Weber bewegte, und zeigt anhand von Studien zu ausgewählten Autoren, wie umfassend und interdisziplinär sein Denken tatsächlich war. Dabei werden nicht nur Autoren aus den Kultur- und Sozialwissenschaften berücksichtigt, sondern auch solche aus den Naturwissenschaften, denn Weber war mit dem Fortschritt dieser Disziplinen ebenfalls vertraut. (shrink)

The account of meta-induction (G. Schurz, Hume’s problem solved: the optimality of meta-induction, MIT Press, Cambridge, 2019) proposes a two-step solution to the problem of induction. Step 1 consists in a mathematical a priori justification of the predictive optimality of meta-induction, upon which step 2 builds a meta-inductive a posteriori justification of object-induction based on its superior track record (Sect. 1). Sterkenburg (Br J Philos Sci, forthcoming. 10.1086/717068/) challenged this account by arguing that meta-induction can only provide a (non-circular) justification (...) of inductive predictions for now and for the next future, but not a justification of inductive generalizations (Sect. 2). This paper develops a meta-inductive method that does provide an a posteriori justification of inductive generalizations, in the form of exchangeability conditions (Sect. 3). In Sect. 4, a limitation of the proposed method is worked out: while the method can justify weakly lawlike generalizations, the justification of strongly lawlike generalizations (claimed to hold for all eternity) requires epistemic principles going beyond meta-induction based on predictive success. (shrink)