David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Synthese 151 (3):499-509 (2006)
The debate between emergentists and reductionists rests on the observation that in many situations, in which it seems desirable to work with a coherent and unified discourse, key predicates fall into different groups, such that pairs of members one taken from each group, cannot be co-predicated of some common subject. Must we settle for ‘island’ discourses in science and human affairs or is some route to a unified discourse still open? To make progress towards resolving the issue the conditions under which such segregations of predicates seem inexorable must be brought out. The distinction between determinable and determinate properties throws light on some aspects of this problem. Bohr’s concept of complementarity, when combined with Gibson’s idea of an affordances as a special class of dispositional properties is helpful. Several seeming problems melt away, for example, how it is possible for a group of notes to become hearable as a melody. The mind-body problem and the viability of the project of reducing biology to chemistry and physics are two issues that are more difficult to deal with. Are mental phenomena, such as feelings and memories emergent from material systems or are they actually material properties themselves? Are the attributes of living beings emergent from certain accidental but long running collocations of chemical reactions, or are they nothing but chemical phenomena? If emergent, in what way are they distinctive from that from which they emerge?
|Keywords||Complementarity Disposition Emergence Properties Reduction Science Bohr, Niels|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
Niels Bohr (1958/2010). Atomic Physics and Human Knowledge. New York, Wiley.
W. Penfield (1975). The Mystery of the Mind. Princeton University Press.
Daniel N. Robinson (1996). Wild Beasts and Idle Humours: The Insanity Defense From Antiquity to the Present. Harvard Univ. Press.
Citations of this work BETA
Radmarz Hosseinie & Mojtaba Mahzoon (2011). Irreducibility and Emergence in Complex Systems and the Quest for Alternative Insights. Complexity 17 (2):10-18.
Similar books and articles
D. Heard (2006). A New Problem for Ontological Emergence. Philosophical Quarterly 56 (222):55-62.
Dugald Murdoch (1987). Niels Bohr's Philosophy of Physics. Cambridge University Press.
John Collier (2008). A Dynamical Account of Emergence. Cybernetics and Human Knowing 15 (3-4):75-86.
Rom Harre (2006). Resolving the Emergence-Reduction Debate. Synthese 151 (3):499-509.
Marco Giunti (2005). Emulation, Reduction, and Emergence in Dynamical Systems. In Proceedings of the 6th Systems Science European Congress, Paris, September 19-22, 2005. (CD-ROM). AFSCET
Richard Healey (2011). Reduction and Emergence in Bose-Einstein Condensates. Foundations of Physics 41 (6):1007-1030.
William C. Wimsatt (1997). Aggregativity: Reductive Heuristics for Finding Emergence. Philosophy of Science 64 (4):372-84.
Jaegwon Kim (2006). Emergence: Core Ideas and Issues. Synthese 151 (3):547-559.
Ausonio Marras (2006). Emergence and Reduction: Reply to Kim. Synthese 151 (3):561-569.
Olivier Massin (2006). Complementarity Cannot Resolve the Emergence–Reduction Debate: Reply to Harré. Synthese 151 (3):511 - 517.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads88 ( #32,256 of 1,725,256 )
Recent downloads (6 months)6 ( #110,378 of 1,725,256 )
How can I increase my downloads?