Theoreticians as Professional Outsiders: The Modeling Strategies of John von Neumann and Norbert Wiener
In Oren Harman & Michael Dietrich (eds.), Biology Outside the Box: Boundary Crossers and Innovation in Biology. Chicago University Press (forthcoming)
| Abstract | Both von Neumann and Wiener were outsiders to biology. Both were inspired by biology and both proposed models and generalizations that proved inspirational for biologists. Around the same time in the 1940s von Neumann developed the notion of self reproducing automata and Wiener suggested an explication of teleology using the notion of negative feedback. These efforts were similar in spirit. Both von Neumann and Wiener used mathematical ideas to attack foundational issues in biology, and the concepts they articulated had lasting effect. But there were significant differences as well. Von Neumann presented a how-possibly model, which sparked interest by mathematicians and computer scientists, while Wiener collaborated more directly with biologists, and his proposal influenced the philosophy of biology. The two cases illustrate different strategies by which mathematicians, the “professional outsiders” of science, can choose to guide their engagement with biological questions and with the biological community, and illustrate different kinds of generalizations that mathematization can contribute to biology. The different strategies employed by von Neumann and Wiener and the types of models they constructed may have affected the fate of von Neumann’s and Wiener’s ideas – as well as the reputation, in biology, of von Neumann and Wiener themselves. | |||||||||
| Keywords | modeling generalization abstraction systems biology theoretical biology teleology self-replication cybernetics purpose | |||||||||
| Categories | ||||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,679 |
| External links |
  Try with proxy. |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesSalim Rashid (1994). John von Neumann, Scientific Method and Empirical Economics. Journal of Economic Methodology 1 (2):279-294.
Lon Becker (2004). That Von Neumann Did Not Believe in a Physical Collapse. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 55 (1):121-135.
Alasdair Urquhart (2010). Von Neumann, Gödel and Complexity Theory. Bulletin of Symbolic Logic 16 (4):516-530.
Leah Henderson (2003). The Von Neumann Entropy: A Reply to Shenker. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 54 (2):291-296.
Giambattista Formica (2010). Von Neumann's Methodology of Science: From Incompleteness Theorems to Later Foundational Reflections. Perspectives on Science 18 (4):480-499.
Ulrich Krohs & Werner Callebaut (2007). Data Without Models Merging with Models Without Data. In Fred C. Boogerd, Frank J. Bruggeman, Jan-Hendrik S. Hofmeyr & Hans V. Westerhoff (eds.), Systems Biology: Philosophical Foundations. Elsevier.
Yorick Wilks (1982). Reviews. [REVIEW] British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 33 (3).
Román Sasyk & Asger Törnquist (2009). Borel Reducibility and Classification of von Neumann Algebras. Bulletin of Symbolic Logic 15 (2):169-183.
Eric Steinhart (2002). Why Numbers Are Sets. Synthese 133 (3):343 - 361.
Titus R. Neumann, Susanne Huber & Heinrich H. Bülthoff (2001). Artificial Systems as Models in Biological Cybernetics. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 24 (6):1071-1072.
Miklós Rédei (2007). The Birth of Quantum Logic. History and Philosophy of Logic 28 (2):107-122.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2011-09-05Total downloads6 ( #145,615 of 549,086 )Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #37,333 of 549,086 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
