810,490 research outputs found
Age friendly communities - achieving positive outcomes by working together
Across a broad scope of global challenges the decade from 2020 to 2030 represents a decisive time. It will, in many respects, be a time for action, one where we have the chance to formulate concrete solutions and enact strategies to ensure we all live well, longer
Retrocausal Effects as a Consequence of Orthodox Quantum Mechanics Refined to Accommodate The Principle of Sufficient Reason
The principle of sufficient reason asserts that anything that happens does so
for a reason: no definite state of affairs can come into being unless there is
a sufficient reason why that particular thing should happen. This principle is
usually attributed to Leibniz, although the first recorded Western philosopher
to use it was Anaximander of Miletus. The demand that nature be rational, in
the sense that it be compatible with the principle of sufficient reason,
conflicts with a basic feature of contemporary orthodox physical theory, namely
the notion that nature's response to the probing action of an observer is
determined by pure chance, and hence on the basis of absolutely no reason at
all. This appeal to pure chance can be deemed to have no rational fundamental
place in reason-based Western science. It is argued here, on the basis of the
other basic principles of quantum physics, that in a world that conforms to the
principle of sufficient reason, the usual quantum statistical rules will
naturally emerge at the pragmatic level, in cases where the reason behind
nature's choice of response is unknown, but that the usual statistics can
become biased in an empirically manifest way when the reason for the choice is
empirically identifiable. It is shown here that if the statistical laws of
quantum mechanics were to be biased in this way then the basically
forward-in-time unfolding of empirical reality described by orthodox quantum
mechanics would generate the appearances of backward-time-effects of the kind
that have been reported in the scientific literature.Comment: v3: Added extra descriptive material and background comment
An Aristotelian Account of Evolution and the Contemporary Philosophy of Biology
The anti-reductionist character of the recent philosophy of biology and the dynamic development of the science of emergent properties prove that the time is ripe to reintroduce the thought of Aristotle, the first advocate of a “top-down” approach in life-sciences, back into the science/philosophy debate. His philosophy of nature provides profound insights particularly in the context of the contemporary science of evolution, which is still struggling with the questions of form, teleology, and the role of chance in evolutionary processes. However, although Aristotle is referenced in the evolutionary debate, a thorough analysis of his theory of hylomorphism and the classical principle of causality which he proposes is still needed in this exchange. Such is the main concern of the first part of the present article which shows Aristotle’s metaphysics of substance as an open system, ready to incorporate new hypothesis of modern and contemporary science. The second part begins with the historical exploration of the trajectory from Darwin to Darwinism regarded as a metaphysical position. This exploration leads to an inquiry into the central topics of the present debate in the philosophy of evolutionary biology. It shows that Aristotle’s understanding of species, teleology, and chance – in the context of his fourfold notion of causality – has a considerable explanatory power which may enhance our understanding of the nature of evolutionary processes. This fact may inspire, in turn, a retrieval of the classical theology of divine action, based on Aristotelian metaphysics, in the science/theology dialogue. The aim of the present article is to prepare a philosophical ground for such project
- …