Submitted to the Faculty of Graduate Studies and Research in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts, Department of Philosophy.

G. Priest's anti-consistency argument (Priest 1979, 1984, 1987) and J. R. Lucas's anti-mechanist argument (Lucas 1961, 1968, 1970, 1984) both appeal to Gödel incompleteness. By way of refuting them, this paper defends the thesis of quartet compatibility, viz., that the logic of the mind can simultaneously be Gödel incomplete, consistent, mechanical, and recursion complete (capable of all means of recursion). A representational approach is pursued, which owes its origin to works by, among others, J. Myhill (1964), P. Benacerraf (1967), J. (...) Webb (1980, 1983) and M. Arbib (1987). It is shown that the fallacy shared by the two arguments under discussion lies in misidentifying two systems, the one for which the Gödel sentence is constructable and to be proved, and the other in which the Gödel sentence in question is indeed provable. It follows that the logic of the mind can surpass its own Gödelian limitation not by being inconsistent or non-mechanistic, but by being capable of representing stronger systems in itself; and so can a proper machine. The concepts of representational provability, representational maximality, formal system capacity, etc., are discussed. (shrink)

Ideas surrounding mechanicism and materialism are so prevalent and fundamental in early modern and modern philosophy and critical theory that almost all key intellectual, political, and theological questions have been cast in their terms. From the 1730s onward, such questions were increasingly connected to the idea of the "man-machine" – the mechanical android. This was not least due to Jacques de Vaucanson's work from the 1730s, and the work of other artisans in the following decades, whose mechanical androids quickly (...) became well-known and provided actual manifestations of man-machines. Eighteenth-century mechanical androids were more sophisticated in regard to mechanical complexity and craftsmanship than those of... (shrink)

The ArgumentThe idea of evolution doubtlessly marks a revolution in our way of thinking. It is the most recent achievement of philosophy and forms the basis of the modern world picture. Current discussions concerning the status of science now convey the impression that any scientific discipline that wants to satisfy modern requirements must also become a theory of evolution. These discussions ignore the reasons which once induced Kant to desist from reformulating classical mechanics as a theory of evolution and instead (...) to found his critical philosophy, according to which the epistemological starting points of natural science and philosophy are different in principle. In other words, there is no examination of whether the reasons given by Kant are of a principle nature so that they are still valid today, but rather, ignoring Kant's arguments, it is taken for granted that a different physical theory than classical mechanics could achieve this.Because nonlinear thermodynamics in particular is often presented as a candidate that justifies hopes of an evolutionary physics, the position of this branch within the structure of physics will be investigated here. It will be seen that a historical component is introduced into physics via initial, boundary, and other supplementary conditions, but that this does not mean that historicity has been grasped in laws, which is of course the point of a scientific theory of development.It is demonstrated that the conclusion drawn for physics by some authors from nonlinear thermodynamics, according to which physics today becomes an evolutionary physics incorporating the cognitive subject, is wrong. The progress made by modern thermodynamics is, without doubt, significant. The widespread philosophical interpretation of thermodynamics rests, however, on an antiquated ontologization of physical concepts and thus on the usual procedure of mechanicism.If one tries to introduce the conception of evolution into natural science by leveling the difference between philosophy and natural science in a mechanistic manner, then the dialectical evolutionary conception which represents a new epoch of human thinking degenerates to an evolutionism, where lawfulness is replaced by accidentalness. (shrink)

One of the most important contributions of Einstein to the philosophy of science is the distinction between two types of scientific theories: ‘principle’ and ‘constructive’ theories. More recently, Flores proposed a more general distinction, classifying scientific theories by their functional role into ‘framework’ and ‘interaction’ theories, attempting to solve some inadequacies in Einstein’s proposal. Here, based on an epistemic criterion, we present a generalised distinction which is an improvement over Flores approach. In this work (i) we evaluate the shortcomings related (...) to Flores’s proposal, (ii) we present an epistemological criterion that opens the door for a more general classification of any scientific theory in all of the natural science into two distinct groups, which we call ‘mechanistic theories’ and ‘structural theories’, and (iii) we show that such a criterion is connected to Flores’ proposal while overcoming issues of all previous approaches. (shrink)

The past thirty years have seen substantive debate on the nature of Robert Boyle’s self-described “Mechanical” or “Corpuscularian” philosophy, its treatment of kinds and qualities, its relation to his experimental studies, its relation to other sixteenth- and seventeenth-century matter theories, and its role in the development of chemistry. Using several different strands from this literature, Marina Banchetti-Robino aims to show how Boyle addresses issues relevant to philosophy of chemistry today: the emergent nature of chemical properties, the mereology of fundamental chemical (...) wholes, and the nonreducibility of chemistry to physics. The last issue frames the whole book, which she describes... (shrink)

This book examines the way in which Robert Boyle seeks to accommodate his complex chemical philosophy within the framework of a mechanistic theory of matter. More specifically, the book proposes that Boyle regards chemical qualities as properties that emerged from the mechanistic structure of chymical atoms. Within Boyle’s chemical ontology, chymical atoms are structured concretions of particles that Boyle regards as chemically elementary entities, that is, as chemical wholes that resist experimental analysis. Although this interpretation of Boyle’s chemical philosophy has (...) already been suggested by other Boyle scholars, the present book provides a sustained philosophical argument to demonstrate that, for Boyle, chemical properties are dispositional, relational, emergent, and supervenient properties. This argument is strengthened by a detailed mereological analysis of Boylean chymical atoms that establishes the kind of theory of wholes and parts that is most consistent with an emergentist conception of chemical properties. The emergentist position that is being attributed to Boyle supports his view that chemical reactions resist direct explanation in terms of the mechanistic properties of fundamental particles, as well as his position regarding the scientific autonomy of chymistry from mechanics and physics. (shrink)

The concept of mechanism in biology has three distinct meanings. It may refer to a philosophical thesis about the nature of life and biology (‘mechanicism’), to the internal workings of a machine-like structure (‘machine mechanism’), or to the causal explanation of a particular phenomenon (‘causal mechanism’). In this paper I trace the conceptual evolution of ‘mechanism’ in the history of biology, and I examine how the three meanings of this term have come to be featured in the philosophy of (...) biology, situating the new ‘mechanismic program’ in this context. I argue that the leading advocates of the mechanismic program (i.e., Craver, Darden, Bechtel, etc.) inadvertently conflate the different senses of ‘mechanism’. Specifically, they all inappropriately endow causal mechanisms with the ontic status of machine mechanisms, and this invariably results in problematic accounts of the role played by mechanism-talk in scientific practice. I suggest that for effective analyses of the concept of mechanism, causal mechanisms need to be distinguished from machine mechanisms, and the new mechanismic program in the philosophy of biology needs to be demarcated from the traditional concerns of mechanistic biology. (shrink)

Author: Sawicki Jerzy Title: THELEOGICAL PRINCIPLE IN KANT’S METHODOLOGY (Zasada teleologiczna w metodologii Kanta) Source: Filo-Sofija year: 2005, vol:.5, number: 2005/1, pages: 281-292 Keywords: KANT, THELEOGICAL PRINCIPLE, FINALISM, MECHANICISM Discipline: PHILOSOPHY Language: POLISH Document type: ARTICLE Publication order reference (Primary author’s office address): E-mail: www:The work contains a concise of I. Kant’s views on the problem of the laws of nature and the theleological principle presented in this context, which Kant proposes in the character of a regulative methodological postulate. (...) The analysis of fundamental philosophical notions (the law of nature, necessity, causality, purpose) carried out from the position of an extreme aprioristic rationalism leads Kant to the conclusion about the basic impossibility of educing the conception of purpose (in relation to nature) from aprioristic transcendental laws, ie. such laws which the theoretical reason imposes to the nature by necessity. However, the fact of a total functioning of an organism does not fit, according to Kant, into the frames of a mechanically understood causality. Kant tries to solve this problem choosing the way of conclusion by analogy and finally he suggests to introduce into the living nature a specific causal relation in which the purposes constitute a particular kind of causes and results at the same time. That conception oscillates between mechanicism and theological finalism, and the fitting of a science system into the frames of aprioristic categories does not permit a finally decide about the supremacy of one or the other way of seeing the world. However, nevertheless, the perceiving and stressing of the peculiarity of organic symptoms, the formulation of the postulate about their unreductability to the law of a mechanical type constitute unquestionable and great merit of the author of the Criticism of the Judgment Authority. The idea of the totality of organism, though involved in subjective idealistic non consequences of Kant’s conceptions has in the given historical period all features of a deep and progressive thought, outpacing and inspiring several later research ideas, both in philosophy and in natural science. (shrink)

This article focuses on Jacques Derrida’s deconstructive re-elaboration of the tradition of mechanicism, from the Cartesian animal–machine to contemporary scientism. It shows that Derrida does not counter this tradition by resorting to the metaphysical presupposition of Freedom – as sovereign independence from the machine – which secures the traditional oppositions of Man and the Machine and of the biological and the psychical. Rather, since his interpretation of the cybernetic concept of programme, he had been concerned with a conception of (...) machines that takes account of their hypercomplexity – that is, of the semiotic and grammatological element implicit in them. According to Derrida, this element provides us with the analogical and general code of the biological and the cultural and thus with the protocol for telling a nonhumanist and differential history of life. In particular, this article explains that the grammatological conception of the cybernetic programme undergirds the re-elaboration of the relation between the biological and the psychical as well as of the Cartesian legacy underpinning the modern thought of the Animal, which Derrida develops in his unpublished seminar La Vie la mort and in his late essays on animality, respectively. (shrink)

Although Descartes’ characterization of the mind has sometimes been seen as too ‘moral’ and too ‘intellectualist’ to serve as a modern notion of consciousness, this article re-establishes the idea that Descartes’ way of doing metaphysics contributed to a novel delineation of the sphere of the mental. Earlier traditions in moral philosophy and religion certainly emphasized both a dualism of mind and body and a contrast between free intellectual activities and forcibly induced passions. Recent scholastic and neo-Stoic philosophical traditions, moreover, drew (...) attention to the disparity between the material and the immaterial, as well as to the possibility of a retreat into the personal realm of one’s own mind. Yet none of these moral and religious assessments of the relation between mind and body were motivated by the purely epistemological interest that we find in Descartes in setting apart a world of consciousness from the world of physics. The present article explains how Descartes made use of specific theological and moral philosophical theories in his own analysis of mental faculties; how he changed the orientation of metaphysics itself in the direction of a phenomenology of the mental; how he never returned to the naive idea of offering a dualist foundation for ethics; and how his mechanicism may have motivated his epistemological transformation of the science of metaphysics. In all these various ways, Descartes inaugurated an understanding of human mental life on the basis of physiological rather than metaphysical considerations, a view of psychology that is related to the experience of human individuals, and a naturalistic characterization of the mind in terms of a domain of consciousness rather than of moral conscience. (shrink)

Advocates of the New Mechanicism in philosophy of science argue that scientific explanation often consists in describing mechanisms responsible for natural phenomena. Despite its successes, one might think that this approach does not square with the ontological strictures of quantum mechanics. New Mechanists suppose that mechanisms are composed of objects with definite properties, which are interconnected via local causal interactions. Quantum mechanics calls these suppositions into question. Since mechanisms are hierarchical it appears that even macroscopic mechanisms must supervene on (...) a set of “objects” that behave non-classically. In this paper we argue, in part by appeal to the theory of quantum decoherence, that the universal validity of quantum mechanics does not undermine neo-mechanistic ontological and explanatory claims as they occur within in classical domains. Additionally, we argue that by relaxation of certain classical assumptions, mechanistic explanatory strategies can sometimes be carried over into the quantum domain. (shrink)

This chapter argues that scientific and philosophical progress in our understanding of the living world requires that we abandon a metaphysics of things in favour of one centred on processes. We identify three main empirical motivations for adopting a process ontology in biology: metabolic turnover, life cycles, and ecological interdependence. We show how taking a processual stance in the philosophy of biology enables us to ground existing critiques of essentialism, reductionism, and mechanicism, all of which have traditionally been associated (...) with substance ontology. We illustrate the consequences of embracing an ontology of processes in biology by considering some of its implications for physiology, genetics, evolution, and medicine. And we attempt to locate the subsequent chapters of the book in relation to the position we defend. (shrink)

Explaining the behaviour of ecosystems is one of the key challenges for the biological sciences. Since 2000, new-mechanicism has been the main model to account for the nature of scientific explanation in biology. The universality of the new-mechanist view in biology has been however put into question due to the existence of explanations that account for some biological phenomena in terms of their mathematical properties (mathematical explanations). Supporters of mathematical explanation have argued that the explanation of the behaviour of (...) ecosystems is usually provided in terms of their mathematical properties, and not in mechanistic terms. They have intensively studied the explanation of the properties of ecosystems that behave following the rules of a non-random network. However, no attention has been devoted to the study of the nature of the explanation in those that form a random network. In this paper, we cover that gap by analysing the explanation of the stability behaviour of the microbiome recently elaborated by Coyte and colleagues, to determine whether it fits with the model of explanation suggested by the new-mechanist or by the defenders of mathematical explanation. Our analysis of this case study supports three theses: (1) that the explanation is not given solely in terms of mechanisms, as the new-mechanists understand the concept; (2) that the mathematical properties that describe the system play an essential explanatory role, but they do not exhaust the explanation; (3) that a non-previously identified appeal to the type of interactions that the entities in the network can exhibit, as well as their abundance, is also necessary for Coyte and colleagues’ account to be fully explanatory. From the combination of these three theses we argue for the necessity of an integrative pluralist view of the nature of behaviour explanation when this is given by appealing to the existence of a random network. (shrink)

Resumen: En este artículo sostengo que los planteamientos de Jakob von Uexküll constituyen un apoyo científico decisivo para las reflexiones metafísicas de Martin Heidegger sobre el mundo, más allá de lo que el mismo Heidegger reconoce explícitamente. En particular, los estudios de Jakob von Uexküll enfatizan, de mejor manera que el mecanicismo y el vitalismo, la relación que existe entre el medio ambiente y el mundo interior del animal, lo que es fundamental para que Heidegger sostenga en su lección de (...) invierno de 1929 y 1930 que la esencia del animal es el "perturbamiento".: In this paper I argue that the scientific approaches of Jakob von Uexküll crucially support Martin Heidegger's metaphysical reflections about the world, beyond what Heidegger himself explicitly recognized. In particular, Jakob von Uexküll's studies emphasized, better than mechanicism and vitalism, the relationship between the environment and the inner world of the animal, which is crucial for Heidegger to claim in his winter 1929-1930 lessons that the essence of the animal is "disturbance". (shrink)

The purpose of this paper is to address the problem of the theoretical crisis in psychology from the perspective of the concept of systematicity of science proposed by German philosopher Paul Hoyningen-Huene. In the first part, I analyse the main assumptions of the idea of systematicity and outline the problem of theoretical crisis in psychology. According to the assumptions, the crisis in psychology may be related to problems with systematicity in some dimensions of psychology. Finally, I consider whether in psychology, (...) basing explanations on the mechanistic strategy of explanation, which is an increasingly popular strategy in the philosophy of social sciences, could strengthen the systematic nature of psychology in the indicated dimensions. (shrink)

Synthetic biology is an umbrella term that covers a range of aims, approaches, and techniques. They are all brought together by common practices of analogizing, synthesizing, mechanicizing, and kludging. With a focus on kludging as the connection point between biology, engineering, and evolution, I show how synthetic biology’s successes depend on custom-built kludges and a creative, “make-it-work” attitude to the construction of biological systems. Such practices do not fit neatly, however, into synthetic biology’s celebration of rational design. Nor do they (...) straightforwardly embody Richard Feynman’s “last blackboard” statement that without creating something it cannot be understood. Reflecting further on the relationship between synthetic construction and knowledge making gives philosophy of science new avenues of insight into scientific practice. (shrink)

The goal of this article is to show that formal analysis and reconstructions may be useful to discuss and shed light on substantive meta-theoretical issues. We proceed here by exemplification, analysing and reconstructing as a case study a paradigmatic biochemical theory, the Monod-Wyman-Changeux theory of allosterism, and applying the reconstruction to the discussion of some issues raised by prominent representatives of the new mechanist philosophy. We conclude that our study shows that at least in this case mechanicism and more (...) traditional accounts are not rivals but complementary approaches. (shrink)

Emergentism is often misleadingly described as a monolithic “third way” between radical monism and pluralism. In the particular case of biology, for example, emergentism is perceived as a middle course between mechanicism and vitalism. In the present paper I propose to show that the conceptual landscape between monism and pluralism is more complex than this classical picture suggests. On the basis of two successive analyses—distinguishing three forms of tension between monism and pluralism and a distinction between derivational and functional (...) reduction—I define three different versions of emergentism that can be considered as consistent middle courses between monism and pluralism . I then emphasise the advantage of this taxonomy of the concepts of emergence by applying the results of my analysis to the historical controversy that pertains to the relationship between life and matter. (shrink)

For Henry More, witchcraft served as an empirical confirmation of the existence of immaterial substances. Yet while he takes great care to make his reports as trustworthy as possible and argues against the claim that the effects of witchcraft are only the illusions of people suffering from melancholy, he almost completely ignores the possibility that such effects may be caused by natural magic. In More’s natural philosophical writings, discussions of magic are very much downplayed, as well. This may seem surprising, (...) as a crucial component of More’s metaphysical system is his doctrine of the Spirit of Nature, a sort of world-soul whose action is nonmechanical, vital, and magical. The essay argues that this deeply ambivalent approach to natural magic is due to the fact that More uses traditional magical notions to supplement the shortcomings of mechanicism and at the same time tries to divorce these notions from the potentially problematic background from which they originated. In the end, the essay suggests, More’s ambivalence toward magic is only one manifestation of a much deeper problem wherein he adopts an immanentist position while trying to avoid its more problematic, potentially pantheistic, consequences. (shrink)

En este trabajo me propongo desarrollar un estudio crítico de la concepción mecanicista de la explicación científica. En primer lugar, argumento que la caracterización mecanicista de los modelos fenoménicos (no explicativos) es inadecuada, pues no ofrece un análisis aceptable de los conceptos de modelo científico y similitud, que son fundamentales para la propuesta. En segundo lugar, sostengo que la caracterización de los modelos mecanicistas (explicativos) es igualmente inadecuada, pues los análisis disponibles de la relación explicativa de relevancia constitutiva implican una (...) tesis metafísica que es rechazada por los mismos mecanicistas. Concluyo que el mecanicismo no ofrece todavía una elucidación aceptable de la explicación científica. -/- In this paper, I offer a critical assessment of the mechanicist approach to scientific explanation. Firstly, I argue that the mechanicist characterization of (non explanatory) phenomenological models is inadequate, since it does not develop an explication of the concepts of scientific model and similarity, which are indispensable to the approach. Secondly, I claim that the mechanicist conception of (explanatory) mechanicist models is inadequate as well, since all the available analices of the explanatory relation of constitutive relevance imply a metaphysical thesis that is rejected by the mechanicists themselves. I conclude that mechanicism needs to be emended if it aims to be considered as a genuinely illuminating approach to scientific explanation. (shrink)

El propósito de este artículo es desarrollar una relectura al mecanicismo moderno. Esto implica que una adecuada comprensión de este consiste, ante todo, en considerarlo como un proyecto antes que un sistema doctrinal consolidado. Para ello se toma como eje la filosofía de Leibniz, la cual, a diferencia del cartesianismo, identifica las inconsistencias que implica concebir el mecanicismo como un sistema filosófico completo, principalmente al pretender justificar mecánicamente el mundo natural, esto es, a partir de la figura, el tamaño y (...) el movimiento. Todo lo anterior no implica un rechazo completo del mecanicismo por parte de Leibniz, sino que permite concebirlo como un medio para desarrollar su filosofía, proponiendo una complementariedad entre la causa final y la causa eficiente. de este modo, el mecanicismo es reubicado como un problema metodológico para la ciencia natural antes que como un problema metafísico. This article aims to develop a second reading to the modern mechanicism. This implies that an appropriate understanding of mechanicism consists, above all, in considering it as a project, instead of a consolidated doctrinal system. To do so, we take Leibniz's philosophy as our building blocks, since unlike the Cartesianism, it does identify the inconsistencies implied when we conceive mechanicism as a complete philosophical system, mainly under the pretension to justify the natural world mechanically, that is, based on the figure, size and movement. It does not imply that Leibniz rejects entirely mechanicism, but allows us to understand it as a mean to develop his philosophy, proposing a complementary relationship between final cause and efficient cause. This way, mechanicism is re-posed as a methodological issue for the natural science instead of a metaphysical issue. (shrink)

A cosmologia proposta no Timeu visa a dupla finalidade de criticar o naturalismo grego e compatibilizar o mundo visível com a teoria das Formas, introduzindo uma série de conceitos reformuladores da tradição. Assente no pressuposto dualista de que a mutabilidade sensível nasceu do modelo eterno, perfeito e imutável, das Formas inteligíveis , a narrativa platónica harmoniza os mundos opostos e coexistentes, dominados pelo teleologismo da Inteligência e mecanicismo da “causa errante”. É o que este texto pretende expor.The cosmology presented in (...) the Timaeus has the twofold purpose of criticizing Greek naturalism and of making the visible world compatible with the Theory of Forms. It does this by reformulating a series of traditional concepts. By adopting the dualistic assumption that the changing sensible world is generated from the eternal, perfect and unchangeable model of intelligible Forms, the Platonic story presents a harmony of opposed but coexistent worlds where the teleologism of Intelligence dominates in one and the mechanicism of the “wandering cause” dominates in the other. (shrink)

The ArgumentIn this answer to “Evolutionism as a Modern Form of Mechanicism”: 287–306) I discuss the strange double use the authors make of their reference to Kant in order to deny the relevance of far-from-equilibrium thermodynamics, and more generally, of the physical irreversibility question in the problem of evolution.On the one hand, the authors quite legitimately use a materialist version of Kantian apriorism in the guise of “means of cognition” presupposed by any physical theory. But on the other hand, (...) they accept a theoretical interpretation of physical irreversibility whose precise historical function was to occult the intrinsic difference between the cognitive means of dynamics and those of thermodynamics in order to promote a mechanistic unification of physics.I thus argue that at stake is not the case of such or such a physicist transgressing the border between philosophy and natural science as defended by von Borzeszkowski and Wahsner, but rather the very interpretation of irreversibility accepted by most physicists since Boltzmann. In contrast, Prigogine's enterprise could be understood as an attempt to take the notion of cognitive means seriously, by approaching the problem of evolution via the problem of the relevance of these means.I conclude with comments on the strategic role Kant is still made to play today by physicists who wish to transform dissents in physical theory into philosophical ones and by philosophers who wish to judge scientists instead of trying to understand them. (shrink)

En este trabajo me propongo desarrollar un estudio crítico de la concepción mecanicista de la explicación científica. En primer lugar, argumento que la caracterización mecanicista de los modelos fenoménicos (no explicativos) es inadecuada, pues no ofrece un análisis aceptable de los conceptos de modelo científico y similitud, que son fundamentales para la propuesta. En segundo lugar, sostengo que la caracterización de los modelos mecanicistas (explicativos) es igualmente inadecuada, pues los análisis disponibles de la relación explicativa de relevancia constitutiva implican una (...) tesis metafísica que es rechazada por los mismos mecanicistas. Concluyo que el mecanicismo no ofrece todavía una elucidación aceptable de la explicación científica. In this paper, I offer a critical assessment of the mechanicist approach to scientific explanation. Firstly, I argue that the mechanicist characterization of (non explanatory) phenomenological models is inadequate, since it does not develop an explication of the concepts of scientific model and similarity, which are indispensable to the approach. Secondly, I claim that the mechanicist conception of (explanatory) mechanicist models is inadequate as well, since all the available analices of the explanatory relation of constitutive relevance imply a metaphysical thesis that is rejected by the mechanicists themselves. I conclude that mechanicism needs to be emended if it aims to be considered as a genuinely illuminating approach to scientific explanation. (shrink)

Le motif du langage visuel, qui traverse l'ensemble de l'oeuvre de Berkeley, n'est pas seulement le noyau de sa philosophie de la perception. Il est aussi le préréquisit d'une preuve originale de l'existence de Dieu, une évaluation spécifique de la nature de l'expérience commune et de la portée de l'explication scientifique, et il a des conséquences singulières quant à la doctrine de la création du monde. La première conclusion de l'article est qu'en dépit du rejet berkeleyen du mécanisme, on peut (...) avec raison comparer sa pensée avec la conception cybernétique des machines à information; le langage visuel est, dans une certaine mesure, la source d'un réseau global de communication. Mais rien n'est plus important pour Berkeley que la question de la mort, et c'est pourquoi il doit rejeter toute forme d'objectivisme. L'immatérialiste est celui qui affirme que le monde ne peut pas survivre à son propre anéantissement sans l'aide d'un autre esprit, dont la vision est la substance même de toute chose. The design of visual language, which pervades the entire work of Berkeley, is not only the core of his philosophy of perception. It is also the prerequisite of an original proof of God's existence, a specific understanding of both the nature of common experience and the scope of scientific explanation, and it involves unusual consequences upon the doctrine of the creation of the world. The first conclusion of the paper is that, despite Berkeley's rejection of mechanicism, we have a right to confront his views with the cybernetic perspective on information processing machines : visual language is, to a certain extent, the source of a global communication network. But there is nothing more important to Berkeley than the topical question of death, and this is why he is compelled to rejecting whatever kind of objectivism. The immaterialist is he who acknowledges that the world cannot survive his own annihilation without the help of another spirit, whose vision is the very substance of all things. (shrink)

New results have been obtained by dynamical systems theory which allow an ammendment of the narrow vision of mechanicism. Forms of behavior richer than the ones considered by classicalmechanicism can be exhibited by the new structures studied by system theory (feedback, reaction-diffusion, hierarchical structures, multiple timescales...). In this paper a critical presentation of these ideas is developed.

¿Cómo hay que entender la tesis de Hegel en la Lógica de que "la teleología es la verdad del mecanismo"? La afirmó contra Kant, desde luego; a saber, contra la posibilidad de que lo que parece teleológico sea sólo mecánico; pero no en el sentido de un compromiso dogmático con la realidad de fines naturales y tampoco en el de una refutación del mecanicismo como la que Fichte busca con su radicalización de la filosofía trascendental. Aquí se examina qué posibilidades (...) quedan abiertas cuando se cierran aquéllas. How should one understand the claim that "Teleology is the truth of Mechanism" advanced by Hegel in the Logic? It certainly opposes Kant's position in denying the possibility that what seems to be teleological is only mechanical, but not in the sense of a dogmatic commitment to the reality of natural ends or in the sense of a refutation of mechanicism as in Fichte's radicalization of transcendental philosophy. I examine in this paper which alternatives remain open once these are discarded. (shrink)

Reinhardt’s conjecture, a formalization of the statement that a truthful knowing machine can know its own truthfulness and mechanicalness, was proved by Carlson using sophisticated structural results about the ordinals and transfinite induction just beyond the first epsilon number. We prove a weaker version of the conjecture, by elementary methods and transfinite induction up to a smaller ordinal.

Jan Patočka's “Galileo Galilei and the End of the Ancient Cosmos” was initially published in the popular science journal Vesmír, 33 (1954), no. 1, pp. 27–29. The year before, there had been published in the same journal, under the general heading “On the Development of the Ideas of Natural Science,” a series of Patočka’s articles, including “The First Critics of Aristotelianism” [Vesmír 32 (1953), no. 7, pp. 254–256]; “The Breakdown of Aristotle’s Dynamics and the Prelude to Modern Mechanicism” (ibid., (...) no. 8, pp. 285–287); “Intermezzo on the Threshold of Modern Science: Cusanus and Comenius” (ibid., no. 9, pp. 322–325). This series had been introduced by yet another text: “Aristotle’s Philosophical Natural Science” [Vesmír 32 (1953), no. 3, pp. 102–105]. A last short essay on the theme of the birth of modern natural science—“On the Significance of Francis Bacon of Verulam” [Vesmír 40 (1961), no. 5, pp. 152, 155, and no. 6, pp. 186–188]—followed several years later. These texts were all subsequently revised to a greater or lesser extent and included in the book Aristoteles, jeho předchůdci a dědicové (Aristotle, His Forerunners and Successors), Prague: NČSAV, 1964. (shrink)

The timeliness of the problem of reduction is due above all to the successes of application of the techniques of the exact sciences in biology. To the extent that molecular biology "gets down to" the initial, fundamental mechanisms of the processes of life, it is impossible for it to remain purely in the realm of statement of facts; it cannot but affect methodological principles of the study of life. "The history of biology clearly demonstrates the striking regularity with which the (...) problem of reductionism arises each time biological knowledge advances to a new level." The counterposing of mechanism and vitalism, elementarism and organicism, etc., was replaced by new forms of methodological discussion born of the achievements of experimental knowledge of life and the demands that this be formulated into theory. To separate the principle of reduction, productive in current biological research, from biological reductionism based on the elevation of this principle to an absolute is the meaning of the current struggle against mechanistic trends in biology. The mechanicism of the present day rests primarily on the productiveness of the methods of physical chemistry in adding to knowledge of life; and therefore when people speak of the problem of reductionism, discussion of the potentials of the investigation of life by molecular biology and the limits of those potentials takes pride of place. (shrink)

Diante do problema de fundamentar criticamente a produção semiótica no interior da formação econômica e social capitalista e mesmo da fase inicial de implantação do socialismo, BAKHTIN, ou seu discípulo VOLOCHINOV, discute as proposições da lingüística de tradição saussuriana e do subjetivismo individualista dos vosslerianos e, evitando o mecanicismo pretensamente marxista, propõe o estabelecimento da instância social e ideológica da formação do discurso. Após elaborar os fundamentos gerais da produção social dos signos, detém-se na análise dos discursos indiretos progressivamente elaborados (...) na literatura burguesa a partir do século XVIII francês.Faced with the problem of lying foundations for the semiotic production inside the capitalistic social and economic formation and even inside the first phase of the establishment of socialim, Bakhtin, or his disciple Volochinov, discusses the propositions of Linguistics along the line of the saussurian tradition and the propositions of the vosslerian individualistic subjectivism; he avoids the pretendedly marxist mechanicism and proposes establishing the social and ideologic instance of the formation of discourse. After formulating the general principles of the social production of signs, Bakhtin analyses the indirect discourses which have been gradually elaborated in the French bourgeois literature since the 18th century. (shrink)