How Philosophy of Mind Needs Philosophy of Chemistry

By the 1960s many (perhaps most) philosophers had adopted ‘physicalism’ ─ the view that physical causes fully account for mental activities. However, controversy persists about what count as ‘physical causes’. ‘Reductive’ physicalists recognize only microphysical (elementary-particle-level) causality. Many (perhaps most) physicalists are ‘non-reductive’ ─ they hold that entities considered by other (‘special’) sciences have causal powers. Philosophy of chemistry can help resolve main issues in philosophy of mind in three ways: developing an extended mereology applicable to chemical combination, testing whether ‘singularities’ prevent reduction of chemistry to microphysics, and demonstrating ‘downward causation’ in complex networks of chemical reactions

How Philosophy of Mind Needs Philosophy of Chemistry

By the 1960s many (perhaps most) philosophers had adopted ‘physicalism’ ─ the view that physical causes fully account for mental activities. However, controversy persists about what count as ‘physical causes’. ‘Reductive’ physicalists recognize only microphysical (elementary-particle-level) causality. Many (perhaps most) physicalists are ‘non-reductive’ ─ they hold that entities considered by other (‘special’) sciences have causal powers. Philosophy of chemistry can help resolve main issues in philosophy of mind in three ways: developing an extended mereology applicable to chemical combination, testing whether ‘singularities’ prevent reduction of chemistry to microphysics, and demonstrating ‘downward causation’ in complex networks of chemical reactions

Designer/industry interface

The transcript from the discussion panel section of this event provides an interesting exchange of ideas around the notion of textile reuse and value. Following on from the exhibition Ever & Again: Experimental Recycled Textiles in October 2007, the Textiles Environment Design (TED) Project organized a one day Textiles Upcycling Symposium at Chelsea College of Art & Design on Friday 18th July 2008. The aims of the Symposium were to engage the audience and invited fashion and interior textile designers in thinking about high quality and innovative recycling practices for the future (‘upcycling’). The morning session featured the work of 12 of the most well known designers working in this field, including Orsola De Castro – ‘From Somewhere’, Kate Goldsworthy, Amy Twigger Holroyd – ‘Keep and Share’, Emmeline Child – ‘Emmeline4Re’, Kerry Seager - ‘Junky Styling’, Cyndi Rhodes – ‘Worn Again’, and Barley Massey – ‘Fabrications’. For the afternoon session invited key participants from industry contributed to an informal panel discussion with the designers and audience, to discuss the potential for shifting these ideas into mainstream and larger scale commercial production. This was chaired by sustainable textiles expert Dr Jo Heeley. The day also included a keynote speech from Professor Marie O’Mahony and a presentation of the outcomes of the three-year research project led by Rebecca Earley, which has involved teaching staff, researchers and students from Chelsea College of Art & Design

Upcycling textiles: adding value through design

The TED/AHRC funded Worn Again project (2005 – 2010) asked twelve designers to create recycled textile products that would have value added to them in the course of recirculation. All the research questions were concerned with exploring new approaches to the recycling of textiles; designing and producing artefacts with strong aesthetic appeal that were contemporary and innovative, and that had improved eco credentials. The project intended to explore both the ‘hard’ and ‘soft’ aspects of eco textile design, with the established principles of material and processes being considered, but also the technical and conceptual ideas. This paper reflects upon: the research questions; the research methodologies utilised and developed; and the concepts that were developed by the designers in order to arrive at a definition of the upcycling of textiles, and a set of guiding principles for best practice. The paper concludes with visions for future practice, including the Twice Upcycled work which explores forward recycling concepts for the polyester economy. The research questions were: •Ethical Production - How can designers work with ethical production values and systems to create a recycled textile product? •Technology - How can new engineering technologies be used to create recycled textile products? •Long Life / Short Life, or ‘Fast’ and ‘Slow’ Textiles - How can recycled materials help lengthen and shorten the life of a textile product thereby promoting resource efficiency? •Design Systems and Services - How can new systems and services around textile recycling and recycled products be designed and implemented? •Multifunction and Detachability – How can designers design textiles and textile products that have multiple uses and detachable elements, thereby promoting resource efficiency and product longevity? •Design Activism – How can textile designers redefine and extend their role within the design community and consumer society? The outcomes for the project included textile product prototypes which ‘rethought’ recycling textiles, through innovative practice and good design, often in collaboration with internal and external partners. Some of the prototypes and samples realised the importance of mono materiality, and the role that engineering technologies can have here. New laser applications eradicated the need for glue and adhesives, and achieved surface effects that cannot be created else where. Others realised and demonstrated that multiple lives and recycling can occur and be pre determined. The impacts of digital print, and over printing in sequential stages were also explored. Concepts relating to the ethical, emotional and systemic were integrated during a second ‘redesign’ stage of the project. The designers explored ideas about upcycling rather than recycling, and the project has been recognised as a leading influence in this field, recognising early on how important this approach is in terms of the economic viability of the reuse of textiles. The project explored how the designer is central to textiles ‘upcycling’. The guiding principles derived from the outcomes of the Worn Again project include: the consideration for the hierarchy of recycling; aesthetics and the design of upcycled textiles that are ‘better’ than the original; the generation of alternative and supporting actions; making enlightened material choices; understanding the different implications of using pre consumer and post consumer waste; the design for future recyclability, and if possible, future upcycling; the consideration of monomateriality, detachability, and the incorporation of the aging process; the design of textiles with zero waste; the design of textiles to maximise the benefits of the product; the consideration for scale - small is beautiful, and start local, but think global. A final question emerged late on in the project from the research methodologies that had been developed through group workshops and tutorials for professional designers: How can designers combine eco-design principles, through workshop scenarios, to create new concepts for the creation of upcycled textile products and services? TED’s TEN – design strategies and workshops that promote interconnected design thinking – were the answer, and continue to be a way for TED to communicate and inspire designers at all stages of their careers

How properties hold together in Substances

This article aims to clarify how aspects of current chemical understanding relate to some important contemporary problems of philosophy. The first section points out that the long-running philosophical debates concerning how properties stay together in substances have neglected the important topic of structure-determining closure. The second part describes several chemically-important types of closure and the third part shows how such closures ground the properties of chemical substances. The fourth section introduces current discussions of structural realism (SR) and contextual emergence: the final sections reconsider the coherence of the properties of substances and concludes that recognition that structures qualify as determinants of specific outcomes—as ‘causes’ as that designation is used in Standard English—clarifies how properties stay together in chemical entities, and by analogy, how characteristics cohere in ordinary items

Naturalism, Theism, and the Origin of Life

Alvin Plantinga and Phillip E. Johnson strongly attack "metaphysical naturalism", a doctrine based, in part, on Darwinian concepts. They claim that this doctrine dominates American academic, educational, and legal thought, and that it is both erroneous and pernicious. Stuart Kauffman claims that currently accepted versions of Darwinian evolutionary theory are radically incomplete, that they should be supplemented by explicit recognition of the importance of coherent structures — the prevalence of "order for free". Both of these developments are here interpreted in relation to some contemporary theistic notions of "creation", including those of Lewis Ford, Robert Neville, and Robert Sokolowski. Kaufmann’s approach is consistent with the approach of process theism, and is not invalidated by the attacks of Plantinga and Johnson

A New ‘Idea of Nature’ for Chemical Education

This paper recommends that chemistry educators shift to a different ‘idea of nature’, an alternative ‘worldview.’ Much of contemporary science and technology deals in one way or another with dynamic coherences that display novel and important properties. The notion of how the world works that such studies and practices generate (and require) is quite different from the earlier concepts that are now integrated into science education. Eventual success in meeting contemporary technological and social challenges requires general diffusion of an overall outlook that focuses on creative generation of novel and useful coherences, replacing a worldview that concentrates on analysis of pre-existing items to minimum constituents. Such a shift in emphasis would amount to general adoption of a new basic model of how nature functions. Chemistry educators can and should provide leadership for this urgently-needed development

Do School Leaders Have a Shelf Life? Career Stages and Headteacher Performance

This paper explores several issues about school leaders, career stages and performance. It draws upon various pieces of research, including the longitudinal study of secondary heads which began in the early 1980s at the National Foundation for Educational Research (NFER), to raise some key issues about headteachers’ careers, the various stages of headship, and the relationship between length of tenure and school leader performance. The paper concludes with some thoughts regarding the future of headship and what needs to be done to ensure that the quality of leadership remains as good as it should be. If leadership at the apex of organisations is as crucial as all the research and inspection evidence suggests, then what needs to be done to ensure a longer ‘shelf life’ for school leaders and is the notion of a limited or fixed-term contract worth revisiting