This thesis presents and evaluates David Chalmers argument that the existence of phenomenal conscious experience constitutes a permanent barrier to the reductive aspirations of a purely materialistic neuroscience. My aim is to defend the possibility of a reductive explanation of consciousness, and argue that continued research in neuroscience and neurophysiology can result in a successful materialistic or reductive solution to the hard problem of consciousness. My argument against Chalmers is two-fold. First, I challenge Chalmers claim that consciousness does not logically supervene on the physical. And second, I argue that his conceivability argument is implausible.

This thesis presents and evaluates David Chalmers argument that the existence of phenomenal conscious experience constitutes a permanent barrier to the reductive aspirations of a purely materialistic neuroscience. My aim is to defend the possibility of a reductive explanation of consciousness, and argue that continued research in neuroscience and neurophysiology can result in a successful materialistic or reductive solution to the hard problem of consciousness. My argument against Chalmers is two-fold. First, I challenge Chalmers claim that consciousness does not logically supervene on the physical. And second, I argue that his conceivability argument is implausible.

Normativity of biological functions create a serious obstacle against the reduction of functional biology into molecular biology. Normativity of biological entities has two interconnected sources. One is the internal complexity and self organization demonstrated by the organism. The second source is external to the organism: Natural selection. An organism adapts to its environment by its internal autonomy. Species or populations adapt by natural selection. If these two sources of normativity can be reduced to statistical generalities achieved by theoretical models, reductionism will prevail.

abstract: A central task for historians and philosophers of science is to characterize and analyze the epistemic practices in a given science. The epistemic practice of a science includes its explanatory goals as well as the methods used to achieve these goals. This dissertation addresses the epistemic practices in gene expression research spanning the mid-twentieth century to the twenty-first century. The critical evaluation of the standard historical narratives of the molecular life sciences clarifies certain philosophical problems with respect to reduction, emergence, and representation, and offers new ways with which to think about the development of scientific research and the nature of scientific change. The first chapter revisits some of the key experiments that contributed to the development of the repression model of genetic regulation in the lac operon and concludes that the early research on gene expression and genetic regulation depict an iterative and integrative process, which was neither reductionist nor holist. In doing so, it challenges a common application of a conceptual framework in the history of biology and offers an alternative framework. The second chapter argues that the concept of emergence in the history and philosophy of biology is too ambiguous to account for the current research in post-genomic molecular biology and it is often erroneously used to argue against some reductionist theses. The third chapter investigates the use of network representations of gene expression in developmental evolution research and takes up some of the conceptual and methodological problems it has generated. The concluding comments present potential avenues for future research arising from each substantial chapter. In sum, this dissertation argues that the epistemic practices of gene expression research are an iterative and integrative process, which produces theoretical representations of the complex interactions in gene expression as networks. Moreover, conceptualizing these interactions as networks constrains empirical research strategies by the limited number of ways in which gene expression can be controlled through general rules of network interactions. Making these strategies explicit helps to clarify how they can explain the dynamic and adaptive features of genomes. / Dissertation/Thesis / Doctoral Dissertation Philosophy 2016

Thesis (MTech (Design))--Cape Peninsula University of Technology, 2016. / This study explores appropriate responses to some of the challenges inherent to life today, and how a holistic design education can bring about a new reality. The approach to design learning advocated here acknowledges the present reality of fragmentation and reductionism as the fundamental and pervasive mode of understanding our world and ourselves, and seeks to develop instead a design approach grounded in inclusion, context and connectedness. Under the primary concept of profound engagement with self, culture and environment, I developed a complementary design education model exploring the role of designer as mediator between culture and nature. This model proposes future design knowing situated in environmental, social and self-awareness so as to offer a vital interface between ecology, public and the personal. Three themes emerged during the research that helped me to approach and engage with complexity during particular experiences of teaching and learning. These themes are: Wild, representing quality; Conversation, representing experience; and Transformation, representing consciousness. With these themes in mind I entered into the untamed territory of my research seeking the dynamic connections and interrelationships of living processes in education. The Ensembles or modules constituting this model evolved from the work of Rudolf Steiner’s concepts of higher perception: Imagination, Inspiration and Intuition, made clear through following Johann Wolfgang von Goethe’s phenomenological method. Goethe’s phenomenological method – “delicate empiricism” – is essentially a participatory, perceptive practice with which to harness qualitative ways of knowing. The methodology supports students to cross the divide between abstraction and holistic relational modes of knowing that are context-sensitive. The research study reconsiders the current worldview and determines ways in which to develop relational awareness through deliberate learning experiences. These ways imply re-focusing existing awareness with personal qualities and active participation. The Ensembles open up new ways of perceiving emergent process rooted in integrated, flexible and evolutionary processes. Students’ learning experiences are traced as they develop their capacity for interconnected decision making modelled on living processes. This in turn helps develop the model further, so that in the future designers may embrace ways of thinking and doing design that are more flexible, mobile, delicate and sustainable. The radical humanist perspective and qualitative methods used in the study advance the pedagogical approach embedded in human engagement and interaction, and encompass logic, intellect, creativity, imagination and philosophical reflection. Thus the critical shift, from perceiving the world as abstract and as “something out there” to a deeper inner knowing and understanding, is embedded in the education model as an opus of Ensembles reflecting a pedagogy of lived experience, grounded in embodied creative practice.

O estadunidense Edward Fredkin, um pioneiro na área de computação, é conhecido por defender a hipótese do mundo natural ser fundamentalmente um sistema de computação digital se partirmos do princípio de que todas as grandezas físicas são discretas, de modo que cada unidade mínima de espaço e tempo possa assumir apenas uma quantidade finita de estados possíveis. Nesse cenário, as transições de estado do universo nas escalas mais elementares poderiam ser representadas por modelos de autômatos celulares, sistemas computacionais formados de unidades espaciais básicas (células) que modificam seus estados em dependência de uma regra de transição que toma o próprio estado da célula com relação às unidades vizinhas. Quando as mudanças de estados das células são consideradas em escalas maiores, é possível notar um comportamento coletivo que parece seguir uma regra própria, não contemplada na programação básica atuando no nível das células. Fredkin acredita que o nível mais microscópico de nosso universo funcione como um autômato celular e, quando sua computação é tomada em maiores escalas, o padrão coletivo é identificado com os elementos que definimos em nossa física atual como elétrons, moléculas, pedras, pessoas e galáxias, ainda que todos esses elementos macroscópicos sejam apenas o resultado de uma computação alterando estados presentes em unidades mínimas de espaço. Diante disso, a intenção deste trabalho é mostrar que a conjectura de Fredkin pode ser interpretada como uma hipótese reducionista, uma vez que todo sistema explicado por nossas teorias físicas podem ser completamente definidos em termos de uma estrutura computacional. / Edward Fredkin, an American computer pioneer, is known for defending that the natural world be fundamentally a digital computing system, assuming that all physical quantities are discrete, in a way that each unit of space and time can only attain a finite number of possible states. In this scenario, the state transitions of the universe, taking place in the most elementary scales, could be represented by cellular automata models, computer systems formed by basic space units (cells) that modify their states in dependence on a transition rule that takes the state of the cell itself with respect to neighboring units. When cell state changes are considered on larger scales, it is possible to notice a collective behavior that seems to follow a rule of its own, not contemplated in basic programming at the cell level. Fredkin believes that the most microscopic level of our universe works as a cellular automaton and when its computation is taken at larger scales, the collective pattern is identified with the elements we define in our current physics as electrons, molecules, stones, people and galaxies, although all these macroscopic elements are only the result of a computation altering the states in minimum space units. The purpose of this work is to show that Fredkin\'s conjecture can be interpreted as a reductionist hypothesis, since every system explained by our physical theories can be completely defined in terms of a computational structure.

Nesta dissertação pretendo reler o debate entre Ronald Dworkin e o positivismo jurídico. Farei isto sob o prisma da filosofia analítica, especificamente, contextualizando o debate no âmbito de uma discussão travada entre três teorias semânticas específicas: a descricional, o externalismo semântico e o bi-dimensionalismo ambicioso. Há algum tempo Dworkin lançou uma crítica ao positivismo, qual seja, o positivismo jurídico pretende reduzir a forma direito de como as coisas são à conformação puramente descritiva de como o mundo é. Disse, ainda, que somente quando concebido como uma teoria semântica é que o positivismo jurídico tornar-se-ia inteligível. Os posivistas, a seu turno, argumentam que a Jurisprudência analítica é um projeto teórico pelo direito e não pelo significado do termo direito e que, portanto, deveríamos manter separados dois tipos de questionamentos: O que é direito? e O que é direito?. Se tudo correr bem, ao reler o debate entre os positivistas e Ronald Dworkin a partir do instrumental obtido no âmbito da teoria semântica, poderemos perceber que pode ser verdade que o positivismo jurídico, enquanto projeto teórico, é sobre o direito, o referente, e não sobre o direito, o termo; entretanto, a forma pela qual o positivismo concebe o questionamento O que é direito?, ele mesmo, parece acabar por qualificá-lo, num sentido não trivial, como semântico. / I intend to reread the debate between Ronald Dworkin and legal positivism. I will do that through the prism of analytic philosophy, specifically in the context of the debate between three specific semantic theories: descriptional, externalism and the ambitious bidimensionalism. Dworkin criticized legal positivism: the legal positivism aims to reduce the law-way of things to the purely descriptive form of the world. He also said that only when conceived as a semantic theory is that legal positivism would become intelligible. The posivists argue that analytical Jurisprudence is a theoretical project about law and not about the meaning of \"law\", therefore we should keep separated two types of questions: \"What is law?\" and \"What is \'law\'?\". If all goes well, when rereading the debate through the prism of the discussion in the context of semantic theories, we will realize that it may be true that legal positivism is about law, the referent, and not about \"law\". However, the way in which positivism conceives the question \"What is law?\" seems to qualify it as semantic in a nontrivial sense.

Um dos debates mais importantes na Filosofia da Ciência é aquele sobre as relações entre os níveis de explicação dos fenômenos e, portanto, os níveis da ciência. Esta controvérsia, intimamente relacionada ao problema metafísico dos níveis da realidade, tem sido marcada por uma polarização entre os reducionistas e seus críticos, geralmente caracterizados como holistas. O primeiro capítulo deste trabalho tem como objetivo a proposição de uma tipologia das posições metodológicas sobre a explicação na qual esta polarização entre holismo e reducionismo seja evitada. Argumenta-se que esta polarização resulta em uma série de mal-entendidos, que contribuem para que as explicações reducionistas sejam vistas, inclusive no ensino de ciências, como as únicas explicações científicas, sendo qualquer posição alternativa considerada contrária aos cânones da ciência. Uma tipologia proposta por Levine e colaboradores em 1987 é tomada como ponto de partida. Esta tipologia evita a polarização comentada acima, incluindo as seguintes posições: individualismo metodológico (reducionismo), holismo, antireducionismo e atomismo. Tendo-se em vista alguns problemas na proposta de Levine e colaboradores, sustenta-se a necessidade da construção de uma nova tipologia. São examinadas algumas tendências, como o fisicalismo de tipos na Filosofia da Mente, os programas da unidade da ciência de Carnap e de Oppenheim & Putnam, e o selecionismo gênico e o gene-centrismo na Biologia, que podem ser caracterizadas como formas de reducionismo, de acordo com a tipologia de Levine e colaboradores. O termo fisicalismo não-redutivo é preferido, em relação a antireducionismo, destacando-se que, apesar de qualificada como não-redutiva, esta variedade de fisicalismo atribui um papel à redução na explicação dos macrofenômenos. Embora os fisicalistas não-redutivos rejeitem a redução ontológica ou epistemológica completa, eles admitem a redução epistemológica parcial, que não resulta em um nivelamento dos fenômenos ao domínio de uma única ciência, mas apenas na explicação, em termos causais/mecânicos, de como e por que macrofenômenos ocorrem em sistemas ou objetos mereologicamente complexos. Variedades moderadas de reducionismo, como as de Bunge e Campbell, são consideradas, bem como algumas variedades de holismo, como o paradigma holístico de Capra, o holismo de Taylor e a abordagem holista de Mayr. A análise destas diferentes abordagens conduz a uma tipologia contendo seis posições metodológicas: atomismo, reducionismo radical, reducionismo moderado, fisicalismo não-redutivo, holismo moderado e holismo radical. O segundo capítulo trata da primeira formulação sistemática do fisicalismo nãoredutivo, o emergentismo. O objetivo principal é chegar a um conceito de emergência de propriedades capaz de contornar as dificuldades apontadas na literatura, propiciando a ontologia ao mesmo tempo materialista e não-reducionista necessária para uma formulação consistente do fisicalismo não-redutivo. Inicialmente, examinam-se as origens do emergentismo, suas relações com o vitalismo e as proposições que constituem seu núcleo duro (sensu Lakatos). As teorias de níveis propostas por Salthe, Bunge, Blitz e Emmeche e colaboradores são discutidas, tomando-se como marcos de referência para o tratamento do conceito de emergência a ontologia de Emmeche e colaboradores e o realismo moderado de Dennet. São examinados problemas acerca do 2 conceito de emergência apontados na literatura, destacando-se o problema da causação descendente: Como explicar a modificação a que um sistema ou uma totalidade submete seus componentes, resultando na emergência da novidade qualitativa, sem violar-se premissas fisicalistas como a crença na universalidade da Física ou o fechamento causal do domínio físico? Após argumentar-se que o fisicalismo de superveniência, apresentado como uma variedade de fisicalismo não-redutivo alternativa ao emergentismo, fracassa em suas intenções não-redutivas, propõe-se a investigação de uma posição filosófica combinando as noções de superveniência e emergência de propriedades. O problema da causação descendente é então discutido em detalhe, considerando-se, primeiro, a possibilidade de o tratamento da causalidade na filosofia aristotélica propiciar uma solução para este problema em um contexto fisicalista. Os quatro modos causais aristotélicos e a distinção entre forma e matéria são examinados, preparando-se o terreno para uma discussão das três versões de causação descendente (forte, fraca e média) distinguidas por Emmeche e colaboradores. A versão média da causação descendente propicia uma maneira de combinar as noções de superveniência e emergência em uma formulação do emergentismo compatível com a identificação das entidades de nível superior com casos especiais de sistemas físicos, sem apresentar as conseqüências reducionistas (radicais) que muitos cientistas e filósofos consideram indesejáveis. No contexto desta variedade de emergentismo, uma nova definição de propriedade emergente é proposta. Por fim, discute-se o problema da realidade dos emergentes com base no realismo moderado de Dennett. No terceiro capítulo, são discutidas algumas conseqüências dos aspectos ontológicos, epistemológicos e metodológicos abordados neste trabalho para o ensino de Biologia e outras ciências. / One of the most important debates in the philosophy of science concerns the relations between levels of explanation and, therefore, levels of science. This controversy, closely related to the metaphysical problem regarding the levels of reality, has been marked by a polarization between reductionists and their critics, generally described as holists. The first chapter of this work is intended to offer a typology of methodological stances on explanation avoiding this polarization between holism and reductionism. Such a marked disagreement results in a series of misunderstandings, contributing to the belief, also found in science teaching, that reductionism provides the only scientific explanations, being any alternative stance regarded as opposed to the canons of science. A typology proposed by Levine and colleagues in 1987 is taken as a starting-point for the discussion. This typology avoids the above-mentioned polarization, including the following positions: methodological individualism (reductionism), holism, antireductionism, and atomism. Due to some problems found in Levine and colleagues approach to the problem, the construction of a new typology is taken as a desirable objective. Some tendencies, like type physicalism in the philosophy of mind, the unity of science programmes of Carnap and Oppenheim & Putnam, and genic selectionism and gene-centrism in biology, are examined, being characterized as forms of reductionism, according to Levine and colleagues typology. The term nonreductive physicalism is preferred to antireductionism, being emphasized that, despite being qualified as nonreductive, this variety of physicalism assigns a role to reduction in the explanation of macrophenomena. Although nonreductive physicalists reject ontological and full epistemological reduction, they admit partial epistemological reduction, which does not result in a leveling of the phenomena to the domain of a single science, but only in the causal/mechanical explanation of why and how macrophenomena occur in mereologically-complex systems or objects. Moderate versions of reductionism, such as those of Bunge and Campbell, are examined, as well as some varieties of holism, such as Capras holistic paradigm, Taylors holism, and Mayrs holistic approach. An analysis of those diverse approaches leads to a typology including six methodological stances: atomism, radical reductionism, moderate reductionism, nonreductive physicalism, moderate holism, and radical holism. In the second chapter, the first systematic formulation of non-reductive physicalism, emergentism, is examined. The main goal is to propose a concept of property emergence that avoids the difficulties presented in the literature, providing the ontology simultaneously materialist and non-reductionist demanded by a cogent formulation of nonreductive physicalism. Initially, the origins of emergentism, its relations to vitalism, and the tenets that compose its hard core (sensu Lakatos) are examined. The theories of levels advanced by Salthe, Bunge, Blitz, and Emmeche and coworkers are discussed, being taken as the frames of reference for the treatment of the emergence concept Emmeche and coworkers ontology and Dennetts mild realism. A series of problems concerning the concept of emergence is examined, emphasis being given to the problem of downward causation: How to explain in what sense a system or 4 whole modifies its component parts, resulting in the emergence of qualitative novelty, without violating physicalist premises, such as the belief in the universality of Physics or the physical causal closure? After arguing that supervenience physicalism, presented as a version of non-reductive physicalism alternative to emergentism, fails in fulfilling its non-reductive purposes, the investigation of a philosophical alternative combining the notions of supervenience and property emergence is proposed. The problem of downward causation is then discussed in detail and the first issue to be dealt with is the possibility that the treatment of causality in Aristotelian philosophy offers a solution to this problem in a physicalist framework. The four Aristotelian causal modes and the distinction between form and matter are examined, as a basis for the discussion of the three versions of downward causation (strong, weak, and medium) distinguished by Emmeche and coworkers. Medium downward causation provides a way of combining the notions of supervenience and property emergence in a formulation of emergentism compatible with the identification of higher-level entities with special cases of physical systems, without the (radical) reductionist consequences that many scientists and philosophers regard as undesirable. In the frame of this variety of emergentism, a new definition of an emergent property is put forward. At last, The problem of the reality of emergents is discussed, from the standpoint of Dennetts mild realism. In the third chapter, some consequences of the ontological, epistemological and methodological features discussed in this work for the teaching of Biology and other sciences are discussed.

This essay examines the role of metaphoric thought at the symposium Beyond reductionism: New perspectives in the life sciences organised by the Hungarian-born writer Arthur Koestler in 1968. The symposium can be interpreted in part as a protest against the metaphor of man as a machine, which was connected by the participants to reductionism in a broader, cosmological sense. Metaphors were widely utilised by the participants to communicate scientific and philosophical ideas, but the use of metaphors was also criticised for over-simplifying a complex reality. Different variants of general system theory were explored by some participants as a way of avoiding the limits of specific metaphoric imagery. Analogies based on modern linguistics were repeatedly used to explain biological and behavourial processes, as an alternative to the established mechanistic, reductionist models. Reductionism was also connected to existential concepts of meaning and alienation in connection with the concurrent student riots. Using Max Black's interactive theory of metaphor, this essay argues that the symposium produced a more coherent anti-reductionist position than is apparent at first sight, while also highlighting the importance of metaphors and analogies in the life sciences discourse of the late 1960's.

No description available.