From the point of view of dialectical materialism, philosophy lies somewhere between the extremes of speculative metaphysics and logical analysis. It has a real object--the most general laws of nature, society, and thought; it attains this object, however, not independently of the special sciences, but only through a logical analysis of its results. Since philosophy studies reality only indirectly, through the sciences, it should be called philosophy of science rather than philosophy of nature. The first task of the philosopher is (...) to analyze the basic concepts of science: space, time, motion, cause. Most of the book is devoted to this task. Space is given a historical survey consisting of short accounts of what various people have said about it, and attributes to Lenin a curious concept of pseudo-absolute space. The discussion of time is organized differently, i.e., by type: absolute, relative, relativistic, biological, and Lenin's pseudo-absolute. Problems of simultaneity and direction of time are touched upon. Causality as a necessary, asymmetrical relation between two coexisting events is defended. The final part of the book is devoted to problems of measurement, relativity, and observation. The aim of the chapter on relativity is to show that this theory supports Lenin's doctrine that "the absolute is in the relative." Observability as the criterion of reality is rejected. Observation is important only as the beginning of knowledge and is transcended in the discovery of general laws. As a whole the book is disappointing because it sacrifices depth to breadth.--T. D. Z. (shrink)

Can there be a moral philosophy which combines Christianity and consequentialism? John Stuart Mill himself claimed that these positions were, at the least, not mutually exclusive, and quite possibly even congenial to one another; and some recent work by Christian philosophers in America has resurrected this claim. But there is a simple argument to show that consequentialism and orthodox Christianity are not so much as jointly assertible.

T. D. Campbell; IV*—Equality of Opportunity, Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, Volume 75, Issue 1, 1 June 1975, Pages 51–68, https://doi.org/10.1093/aris.

Quentin Smith contends that modern science provides enough evidence ‘to justify the belief that the universe began to exist without being caused to do so.’There was a time when such a claim would have been dismissed because it conflicts with a principle absolutely fundamental to all human thought, including science itself. As Thomas Reid expressed the matter:That neither existence, nor any mode of existence, can begin without an efficient cause is a principle that appears very early in the mind of (...) man; and it is so universal, and so firmly rooted in human nature, that the most determined scepticism cannot eradicate it. (shrink)

Constructive Neutral Evolution is an evolutionary mechanism that can explain much molecular inter-dependence and organismal complexity without assuming positive selection favoring such dependency or complexity, either directly or as a byproduct of adaptation. It differs from but complements other non-selective explanations for complexity, such as genetic drift and the Zero Force Evolutionary Law, by being ratchet-like in character. With CNE, purifying selection maintains dependencies or complexities that were neutrally evolved. Preliminary treatments use it to explain specific genetic and molecular structures (...) or processes, such as retained gene duplications, the spliceosome, and RNA editing. Here we aim to expand the scope of such explanation beyond the molecular level, integrating CNE with Multi-Level Selection theory, and arguing that several popular higher-level selection scenarios are in fact instances of CNE. Suitably contextualized, CNE occurs at any level in the biological hierarchy at which natural selection as normally construed occurs. As examples, we focus on modularity in protein–protein interaction networks or “interactomes,” the origin of eukaryotic cells and the evolution of co-dependence in microbial communities—a variant of the “Black Queen Hypothesis” which we call the “Gray Queen Hypothesis”. (shrink)

Quentin Smith contends that modern science provides enough evidence ‘to justify the belief that the universe began to exist without being caused to do so.’ There was a time when such a claim would have been dismissed because it conflicts with a principle absolutely fundamental to all human thought, including science itself. As Thomas Reid expressed the matter: That neither existence, nor any mode of existence, can begin without an efficient cause is a principle that appears very early in the (...) mind of man; and it is so universal, and so firmly rooted in human nature, that the most determined scepticism cannot eradicate it. (shrink)

Book reviewed in this article:F.H. Bradley, Collected Works Volumes 1–5.