Logical Positivism and Carnap's Confirmability on the Meaningfulness of Religious Language

Due to their acceptance of the verifiability principle, the only way left for logical positivists to argue for the meaningfulness of religious language was to accept some sort of emotivistic conception of it or to reduce it to the description of religious attitude. The verifiability principle, however, suffers from some severe limitations that make it inadequate as a criterion for cognitive meaning. To resolve these problems, logical positivists gave up the requirement of conclusive verifiability and defended a sort of ‘liberalization’ of the verifiability principle. Carnap’s confirmability criterion for cognitive meaning, which is a liberalized form of the verifiability principle, is compatible with an orthodox conception of religious language since, from a theistic perspective, the existence of God can be confirmed through our observational statements

Mental States Are Like Diseases

While Quine’s linguistic behaviorism is well-known, his Kant Lectures contain one of his most detailed discussions of behaviorism in psychology and the philosophy of mind. Quine clarifies the nature of his psychological commitments by arguing for a modest view that is against ‘excessively restrictive’ variants of behaviorism while maintaining ‘a good measure of behaviorist discipline…to keep [our mental] terms under control’. In this paper, I use Quine’s Kant Lectures to reconstruct his position. I distinguish three types of behaviorism in psychology and the philosophy of mind: ontological behaviorism, logical behaviorism, and epistemological behaviorism. I then consider Quine’s perspective on each of these views and argue that he does not fully accept any of them. By combining these perspectives we arrive at Quine’s surprisingly subtle view about behaviorism in psychology

Quantum Non-Objectivity from Performativity of Quantum Phenomena

We analyze the logical foundations of quantum mechanics (QM) by stressing non-objectivity of quantum observables which is a consequence of the absence of logical atoms in QM. We argue that the matter of quantum non-objectivity is that, on the one hand, the formalism of QM constructed as a mathematical theory is self-consistent, but, on the other hand, quantum phenomena as results of experimenter's performances are not self-consistent. This self-inconsistency is an effect of that the language of QM differs much from the language of human performances. The first is the language of a mathematical theory which uses some Aristotelian and Russellian assumptions (e.g., the assumption that there are logical atoms). The second language consists of performative propositions which are self-inconsistent only from the viewpoint of conventional mathematical theory, but they satisfy another logic which is non-Aristotelian. Hence, the representation of quantum reality in linguistic terms may be different: from a mathematical theory to a logic of performative propositions. To solve quantum self-inconsistency, we apply the formalism of non-classical self-referent logics

Systems Biology Graphical Notation: Process Diagram Level 1

Standard graphical representations have played a crucial role in science and engineering throughout the last century. Without electrical symbolism, it is very likely that our industrial society would not have evolved at the same pace. Similarly, specialised notations such as the Feynmann notation or the process flow diagrams did a lot for the adoption of concepts in their own fields. With the advent of Systems Biology, and more recently of Synthetic Biology, the need for precise and unambiguous descriptions of biochemical interactions has become more pressing. While some ideas have been advanced over the last decade, with a few detailed proposals, no actual community standard has emerged. The Systems Biology Graphical Notation (SBGN) is a graphical representation crafted over several years by a community of biochemists, modellers and computer scientists. Three orthogonal and complementary languages have been created, the Process Diagrams, the Entity Relationship Diagrams and the Activity Flow Diagrams. Using these three idioms a scientist can represent any network of biochemical interactions, which can then be interpreted in an unambiguous way. The set of symbols used is limited, and the grammar quite simple, to allow its usage in textbooks and its teaching directly in high schools. The first level of the SBGN Process Diagram has been publicly released. Software support for SBGN Process Diagram was developed concurrently with its specification in order to speed-up public adoption. Shared by the communities of biochemists, genomicians, theoreticians and computational biologists, SBGN languages will foster efficient storage, exchange and reuse of information on signalling pathways, metabolic networks and gene regulatory maps

Theoretical ecology as etiological from the start

The world’s leading environmental advisory institutions look to ecological theory and research as an objective guide for policy and resource management decision-making. In addition to various theoretical merits of doing so, it is therefore crucially important to clear up confusions about ecology’s conceptual foundations and to make plain the basic workings of inferential methods used in the science. Through discussion of key moments in the genesis of the theoretical branch of ecology, this essay elucidates a general heuristic role of teleological metaphor in ecological research and defuses certain enduring confusions and misguided criticisms of current work in ecology

Logical Form, the First Person, and Naturalism about Psychology: The Case Against Physicalist Imperialism

Physicalistic theories of psychology are a classic case of scientific imperialism: the explanatory capacity of physics, both with respect to its methods and to its domain, is taken to extend beyond the traditional realm of physics, and into that of psychology. I argue in this paper that this particular imperialistic venture has failed. Contemporary psychology uses methods not modelled on those of physics, embracing first-personal methodology where physics is strictly impersonal. I make the case that whether or not scientific imperialism is in general harmful, in this instance naturalists who reject first philosophy should give up physicalist imperialism. Using only general principles from the philosophy of logic plus accepted physicalist criteria of identity, I show that first-personal psychology embodies a minor but fruitful increase in expressive strength compared to impersonal psychology: the ability to distinguish descriptively indiscriminable posits

An Investigation on the Basic Conceptual Foundations of Quantum Mechanics by Using the Clifford Algebra

We review our approach to quantum mechanics adding also some new interesting results. We start by giving proof of two important theorems on the existence of the and Clifford algebras. This last algebra gives proof of the von Neumann basic postulates on the quantum measurement explaining thus in an algebraic manner the wave function collapse postulated in standard quantum theory. In this manner we reach the objective to expose a self-consistent version of quantum mechanics. We give proof of the quantum like Heisenberg uncertainty relations, the phenomenon of quantum Mach Zender interference as well as quantum collapse in some cases of physical interest We also discuss the problem of time evolution of quantum systems as well as the changes in space location. We also give demonstration of the Kocken-Specher theorem, and also we give an algebraic formulation and explanation of the EPR . By using the same approach we also derive Bell inequalities. Our formulation is strongly based on the use of idempotents that are contained in Clifford algebra. Their counterpart in quantum mechanics is represented by the projection operators that are interpreted as logical statements, following the basic von Neumann results. Using the Clifford algebra we are able to invert such result. According to the results previously obtained by Orlov in 1994, we are able to give proof that quantum mechanics derives from logic. We show that indeterminism and quantum interference have their origin in the logic.Comment: forthcoming papers; http://www.m-hikari.com/astp/forth/index.htm

Immanent Powers versus Causal Powers (Propensities, Latencies and Dispositions) in Quantum Mechanics

In this paper we compare two different notions of 'power', both of which attempt to provide a realist understanding of quantum mechanics grounded on the potential mode of existence. For this propose we will begin by introducing two different notions of potentiality present already within Aristotelian metaphysics, namely, irrational potentiality and rational potentiality. After discussing the role played by potentiality within classical and quantum mechanics, we will address the notion of causal power which is directly related to irrational potentiality and has been adopted by many interpretations of QM. We will then present the notion of immanent power which relates to rational potentiality and argue that this new concept presents important advantages regarding the possibilities it provides for understanding in a novel manner the theory of quanta. We end our paper with a comparison between both notions of 'power', stressing some radical differences between them.Comment: Forthcoming in: Probing the Meaning and Structure of Quantum Mechanics, D. Aerts, M.L. Dalla Chiara, C. de Ronde and D. Krause (Eds.), World Scientific, Singapore. arXiv admin note: text overlap with arXiv:1310.453

Atheistic teleology

Wesley Salmon and Michael Martin argue that scientific considerations about the order in the universe justify atheism. After sketching Salmon’s argument, I examine the nature of begging the question and argue that Martin takes a sufficient condition of that fallacy to be a necessary condition. After a pragmatic account to the fallacy is recommended, I point out how Salmon’s and Martin’s beg the question against all save those who already adhere to atheism and that the crucial considerations that they take to be distinctly scientific are really extra-scientific considerations, giving a specious impression that they are uncontroversial to all who accept mainstream science