Whence philosophy of biology?

A consensus exists among contemporary philosophers of biology about the history of their field. According to the received view, mainstream philosophy of science in the 1930s, 40s, and 50s focused on physics and general epistemology, neglecting analyses of the ‘special sciences’, including biology. The subdiscipline of philosophy of biology emerged (and could only have emerged) after the decline of logical positivism in the 1960s and 70s. In this paper, I present bibliometric data from four major philosophy of science journals (Erkenntnis, Philosophy of Science, Synthese, and the British Journal for the Philosophy of Science), covering 1930-1959, which challenge this view

Negotiating with a logical-linguistic protocol in a dialogical framework

This book is the result of years of reflection. Some time ago, while working in commodities, the author felt how difficult it was to decide the order in which to use arguments during a negotiation process. What would happen if we translated the arguments into cards and played them according to the rules of the Bridge game? The results were impressive. There was potential for improvement in the negotiation process. The investigation went deeper, exploring players, cards, deals and the information concealed in the players´ announcements, in the cards and in the deals. This new angle brought the research to NeuroLinguistic Patterns and cryptic languages, such as Russian Cards. In the following pages, the author shares her discovery of a new application for Logical Dialogues: Negotiations, tackled from basic linguistic structures placed under a dialogue form as a cognitive system which ‘understands’ natural language, with the aim to solve conflicts and even to serve peace

Systems Metaphysics: A Bridge from Science to Religion

\u27Systems theory\u27 is familiar to many as the scientific enterprise that includes the study of chaos, networks, and complex adaptive systems. It is less widely appreciated that the systems research program offers a world view that transcends the individual scientific disciplines. We do not live, as some argue, in a post-metaphysical age, but rather at a time when a new metaphysics is being constructed. This metaphysics is scientific and derives from graph theory, information theory, non-linear dynamics, decision theory, game theory, generalized evolution, and other transdisciplinary theories. These \u27systems\u27 theories focus on form and process, independent of materiality; they are thus relevant to both the natural and social sciences and even to the humanities and the arts. Concerned more with the complex than the very small or very large, they constitute a metaphysics that is centered in biology, and thus near rather than far from the human scale. Systems metaphysics forges a unity of science based on what is general instead of what is fundamental; it is thus genuinely about everything. It counters the nihilism of narrow interpretations of science by affirming the link between fact and value and the reality of purpose and freedom in the natural world. It offers scientific knowledge that is individually useful as a source of insight, not merely societally useful, as a source of technology. With the new world view that it brings, systems metaphysics contributes to the recovery of cultural coherence. It builds a philosophical bridge between science and religion that is informed by our understanding of living systems. It suggests a secular theodicy in which imperfection is lawful yet perfecting is always possible, and uses this perspective to analyze religions as systems. It provides scientific insights into traditional religious concepts, including those ideas that guide spiritual practice

Beyond Identity: the Dynamic Self at the Intersection of Performance Philosophy and the Philosophy of Science

In this article we advocate the methodological feedback loop in the study of the dynamical self at the crossroads of performance philosophy, (artistic) performance, and the philosophy of science. We point to the importance of the dynamics of methodology transfer between arts and sciences and the “interactive continuum” proposed by Newman & Benz in 1998. In the first part of this paper we give a comparative review of the research context relevant for our field of study, and we explain our research hubs in approaching the concept of “performance”. We suggest the possibility to define our filed of research in three equally legitimate ways: as philosophy-of-performance, philosophy-as-performance and performance-as-philosophy. In our recent work we are primarily interested in artistic performances that incorporate elements of artistic practice in the methodology of research output (Frayling 1993), as well as in the potentials of performative aspects of scientific praxis and methodology. However, the conceptual background relevant for this paper is in the field of process philosophy and its relation to science (Birkhard’s “interactivist model” 2009; Campbell’s “process-based model for an interactive ontology” 2009). We attribute particular importance to the notion of “autopoietic feedback” (Maturana and Varela 1974; Luhmann 1990). The second part addresses the issue of transcending identity in the representations of the self and the other; the relationship between Theory-Theory (TT) and Simulation Theory (ST), as well as some recent attempts at combining different theories of mind (e.g. Barlassina 2013). We also deal with the notion of “embodied praxis” (Gallagher and Meltzoff 1996); we mention some neuroscientific insights into the similar phenomena, and – commenting on the importance of the dialogue between neuroscientists and philosophers (Changeux and Ricour) – we give an example of an enactive approach to understanding acting (Zarrilli 2007). In the third part of this article, we critique the notion of “interpassivity” (Žižek 1997; Pfaller 2000). In the concluding part we mention the importance of exploring the concept of “expanded self” (Gallagher 2000; Jeannerod 2003; Kim and Johnson 2013). Being aware of the impossibility to reach final conclusions in the scientific approach to the dynamics of the self, instead of a formal conclusion, we offer a quote from Yeats’ poem “Balloons of Mind”

Body and the senses in spatial experience: the implications of kinesthetic and synesthetic perceptions for design thinking

Human perception has long been a critical subject of design thinking. While various studies have stressed the link between thinking and acting, particularly in spatial experience, the term "design thinking" seems to disconnect conceptual thinking from physical expression or process. Spatial perception is multimodal and fundamentally bound to the body that is not a mere receptor of sensory stimuli but an active agent engaged with the perceivable environment. The body apprehends the experience in which one's kinesthetic engagement and knowledge play an essential role. Although design disciplines have integrated the abstract, metaphoric, and visual aspects of the body and its movement into conceptual thinking, studies have pointed out that design disciplines have emphasized visuality above the other sensory domains and heavily engaged with the perception of visual configurations, relying on the Gestalt principles. Gestalt psychology must be valued for its attention to a whole. However, the theories of design elements and principles over-empathizing such visuality posit the aesthetics of design mainly as visual value and understate other sensorial and perceptual aspects. Although the visual approach may provide a practical means to represent and communicate ideas, a design process heavily driven by visuality can exhibit weaknesses undermining certain aspects of spatial experience despite the complexity. Grounded in Merleau-Ponty's notion of multisensory perception, this article discusses the relationship between body awareness and spatial perception and its implication for design disciplines concerning built environments. Special attention is given to the concepts of kinesthetic and synesthetic phenomena known as multisensory and cross-sensory, respectively. This discussion integrates the corporeal and spatiotemporal realms of human experience into the discourse of kinesthetic and synesthetic perceptions. Based on the conceptual, theoretical, and precedent analyses, this article proposes three models for design thinking: Synesthetic Translation, Kinesthetic Resonance, and Kinesthetic Engagement. To discuss the concepts rooted in action-based perception and embodied cognition, this study borrows the neurological interpretation of haptic perception, interoception, and proprioception of space. This article suggests how consideration of the kinesthetic or synesthetic body can deepen and challenge the existing models of the perceptual aspects of environmental psychology adopted in design disciplines.Includes bibliographical references

The Metaphysics of Improvisation

In The Metaphysics of Improvisation, I criticize wrongheaded metaphysical views of, and theories about, improvisation, and put forward a cogent metaphysical theory of improvisation, which includes action theory, an analysis of the relevant genetic and aesthetic properties, and ontology (work-hood). The dissertation has two Parts. Part I is a survey of the history of many improvisational practices, and of the concept of improvisation. Here I delineate, sketch, and sort out the often vague boundaries between improvising and non-improvising within many art forms and genres, including music, dance, theatre, motion pictures, painting, and literature. In addition, I discuss the concept of non-artistic improvisation in various contexts. I attempt to portray an accurate picture of how improvisation functions, or does not function, in various art forms and genres. Part II addresses metaphysical issues in, and problems and questions of, improvisation in the arts. I argue that that continuum and genus-species models are the most cogent ways to understand the action-types of improvising and composing and their relations. I demonstrate that these models are substantiated by an informed investigation and phenomenology of improvisational practice, action theory conceptual analysis, cognitive neuroscience studies and experiments, cognitive psychology studies and models, and some theories of creativity. In addition, I provide a constraint based taxonomy for classifying improvisations that is compatible with, and supports, the continuum model. Next, I address epistemological and ontological issues involving the genetic properties of improvisations, and the properties improvisatory, and as if improvised. Finally, I show that arguments against treating, or classifying, improvisations as works are weak or erroneous, and by focusing on music, I provide a correct ontological theory of work-hood for artistic improvisations

Multivalued Logic, Neutrosophy and Schrodinger equation

This book was intended to discuss some paradoxes in Quantum Mechanics from the viewpoint of Multi-Valued-logic pioneered by Lukasiewicz, and a recent concept Neutrosophic Logic. Essentially, this new concept offers new insights on the idea of ‘identity’, which too often it has been accepted as given. Neutrosophy itself was developed in attempt to generalize Fuzzy-Logic introduced by L. Zadeh. While some aspects of theoretical foundations of logic are discussed, this book is not intended solely for pure mathematicians, but instead for physicists in the hope that some of ideas presented herein will be found useful. The book is motivated by observation that despite almost eight decades, there is indication that some of those paradoxes known in Quantum Physics are not yet solved. In our knowledge, this is because the solution of those paradoxes requires re-examination of the foundations of logic itself, in particular on the notion of identity and multi-valuedness of entity. The book is also intended for young physicist fellows who think that somewhere there should be a ‘complete’ explanation of these paradoxes in Quantum Mechanics. If this book doesn’t answer all of their questions, it is our hope that at least it offers a new alternative viewpoint for these old questions

Art in Action Research (AiAR)

Zweck: In den letzten Jahrzehnten hat das Interesse an sozial engagierter Kunst, Art in Action, stetig zugenommen. Bisher fehlt allerdings eine Praktiker-Forschung (practitioner research), welche Fragen aus der Arbeitswelt in den Forschungsmittelpunkt stellt und die glokalen Gegebenheiten praxisrelevant diskutiert. Diese Studie untersucht die Grundannahmen der Kunstgeschichte, welche bisher die Einführung der Praktiker-Forschung erschweren. Die Studie kontextualisiert und diskutiert zudem die Besonderheiten der künstlerischen Forschung sowie der Praktiker-Forschung in anderen disziplinären Feldern. Daran anschliessend formuliert diese Studie die Prinzipien der Art in Action Methodik. Methodik: Diese transformative Studie arbeitet mit dem Global Studies Paradigma. Der konzeptionelle Apparat umfasst die Kaleidoskopische Dialektik, das Konzept der Glokalisierung und die Theorien der Transdisziplinarität und der Meta-Narrativen Synthese. Ergebnis: Diese Studie formuliert die Prinzipien der Art in Action Methodik (AiAR). AiAR stellt Fragen aus der Arbeitswelt in den Mittelpunkt der Forschung, berücksichtigt lokale Gegebenheiten und organisiert den Forschungsprozess in Relation zu den projektrelevanten Partikularitäten (grounded methodology).Purpose: In the last few decades, there has been a steadily growing interest in socially engaged art, i.e., working with art in socio-cultural settings (Art in Action). What has been missing, however, are art practitioner research methodologies that place issues emerging from art practitioner work environment at centre stage. This study explores the critical assumptions of art history, which have so far hindered a practitioner-driven research approach. It contextualises and discusses the specificities of artistic research and practitioner research. On this basis, the study formulates an Art in Action research methodology. Methodology: This transformative research applies a global studies paradigm. Its conceptual apparatus includes the kaleidoscopic dialectic, the concept of glocalisation, and the theories of transdisciplinarity and meta-narrative synthesis. Result: This study formulates principles for an Art in Action research (AiAR) methodology that places the issues emerging from the art practitioners’ work environments centre stage instead of an artwork-centred approach. It postulates that AiAR works with grounded research procedures

The growth of 'connected' firms: a re-appraisal of Penrosian theory and its application to artisanal firms operating in contemporary business networks

This thesis is concerned with the growth of ‘connected’ firms, characterised as small firms that are engaged in stable spatial and vertical network relationships, involving a variety of actors, including larger firms. It locates these firms within the landscape of the ‘New Competition’, (Best 1990, 2001), highlighting the relatively unexplored region occupied by connected artisanal firms. The literature review is constructed around a detailed re-appraisal of Edith Penrose’s (1959) study, The Theory of the Growth of the Firm, which traces its antecedents, re-constructs its interconnections and calibrates its explanatory potential against the work of contemporaries, successors and opponents. The review provides the basis for development of a modified Penrosian framework, designed to embrace a multi-level analysis of growth processes that span the ‘blurred boundaries’ of the connected firm. An empirical study of the growth of connected artisanal firms demonstrates the application of this modified framework. The study is presented in the form of an analytically structured narrative, illustrated by network mapping sequences and informed by a qualified critical realist perspective. The final chapters reflect on the theoretical, methodological and practical policy implications of the study, highlighting the broader implications for researching the growth of other forms of connected firm

Pierre Duhem’s philosophy and history of science

LEITE (Fábio Rodrigo) – STOFFEL (Jean-François), Introduction (pp. 3-6). BARRA (Eduardo Salles de O.) – SANTOS (Ricardo Batista dos), Duhem’s analysis of Newtonian method and the logical priority of physics over metaphysics (pp. 7-19). BORDONI (Stefano), The French roots of Duhem’s early historiography and epistemology (pp. 20-35). CHIAPPIN (José R. N.) – LARANJEIRAS (Cássio Costa), Duhem’s critical analysis of mecha­ni­cism and his defense of a formal conception of theoretical phy­sics (pp. 36-53). GUEGUEN (Marie) – PSILLOS (Stathis), Anti-­scepticism and epistemic humility in Pierre Duhem’s philosophy of science (pp. 54-72). LISTON (Michael), Duhem : images of science, historical continuity, and the first crisis in physics (pp. 73-84). MAIOCCHI (Roberto), Duhem in pre-war Italian philos­ophy : the reasons of an absence (pp. 85-92). HERNÁNDEZ MÁRQUEZ (Víctor Manuel), Was Pierre Duhem an «esprit de finesse» ? (pp. 93-107). NEEDHAM (Paul), Was Duhem justified in not distinguishing between physical and chemical atomism ? (pp. 108-111). OLGUIN (Roberto Estrada), «Bon sens» and «noûs» (pp. 112-126). OLIVEIRA (Amelia J.), Duhem’s legacy for the change in the historiography of science : An analysis based on Kuhn’s writings (pp. 127-139). PRÍNCIPE (João), Poincaré and Duhem : Resonances in their first epistemological reflec­tions (pp. 140-156). MONDRAGON (Damián Islas), Book review of «Pierre Duhem : entre física y metafísica» (pp. 157-159). STOFFEL (Jean-François), Book review of P. Duhem : «La théorie physique : son objet, sa structure» / edit. by S. Roux (pp. 160-162). STOFFEL (Jean-François), Book review of St. Bordoni : «When historiography met epistemology» (pp. 163-165)