بررسی انتقادی معنا و امکان وقوع تحول پارادایمی از طریق قبول نوخاسته‌گرایی

نوع مقاله: علمی پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 عضو هیات علمی گروه فلسفه علم دانشگاه صنعتی شریف، تهران، ایران

2 دانشجوی دکتری فلسفه دین، پژوهشگاه علوم انسانی و مطالعات فرهنگی، تهران، ایران

چکیده

نوخاسته‌گرایان مشهوری نظیر نانسی مورفی و پاول دیویس مدعی‌اند قبول برخی دیدگاه‌های نوخاسته‌گرایانه وقوع تحولی اساسی در پارادایم علمی حاکم را در پی دارد. در این مقاله، نخست با واکاوی مضامین اصلی مربوط به مواضعی نظیر طبیعت‌گرایی، تقلیل‌گرایی، علم‌گرایی و نظیر اینها، تحلیلی کلی از مؤلفه‌های پارادایم علمی ارائه می‌شود. در ضمن این تحلیل، مؤلفه‌های مختلف مربوط به پارادایم علمی تبیین شده، نسبت این مؤلفه‌ها با یکدیگر بررسی می‌شود. پس از آن، به بررسی دیدگاه‌های نوخاسته‌گرایانه از هر دو قسم نوخاسته‌گرایی ضعیف و نوخاسته‌گرایی قوی می‌پردازیم، و پس از دسته‌بندی این دیدگاه‌ها، نسبتشان را با مؤلفه‌های پارادایم علمی ارزیابی می‌کنیم. بررسی و دسته‌بندی دیدگاه‌های نوخاسته‌گرایانه بر اساس تفکیک دیدگاه‌های قائل به وجود سلسله‌مراتب در طبیعت در مقابل دیدگاه‌های قائل به سلسله‌مراتبی بودن تبیین، و نیز دیدگاه‌های مختلف درباره امکان و نحوه اثرگذاری علّی سطوح بالاتر از سطح فیزیکی بر وضعیت جهان انجام می‌شود. نتیجه این بررسی نشان می‌دهد که بر خلاف دیدگاه نوخاسته‌گرایانی نظیر مورفی و دیویس، قبول نوخاسته‌گرایی وقوع تحول پارادایمی را در پی ندارد و برخی دیدگاه‌های خاص ذیل این موضع فلسفی، به صورت محدود، با برخی مؤلفه‌های پارادایم علمی حاکم ناسازگارند.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

Critical Examination of Meaning and the Possibility of Paradigm Shift by Accepting Emergentism

نویسندگان [English]

  • Seyed Hassan Hosseini 1
  • Massoud Toossi Saeidi 2

1 Department for Philosophy of Science, Faculty Member, Sharif University of Technology, Tehran, Iran

2 PhD Candidate for Philosophy of Religion, Institution for Humanities and Cultural Studies, Tehran, Iran

چکیده [English]

Famous emergentists such as Nancy Murphy and Paul Davies claim accepting some emergentists' views would lead to a fundamental change in the prevailing scientific paradigm. This article first provides a general analysis of the components of the scientific paradigm by examining the main themes of positions such as naturalism, reductionism, scientism, and the like. In the course of this analysis, the various components of the scientific paradigm are explained, and the relation of these components to each other is examined. Afterwards, we examine emergentists' views of both weak and strong doctrines, and after classifying these views, we evaluate their relation to the components of the scientific paradigm. Investigating and classifying emergentists' views is done based on separating the views accepting hierarchy in nature in an ontological sense, against the views accepting just hierarchy in our explanations about nature, as well as the different views on the possibility of causal effects from higher than physical levels on the world situation. The results of this study show that, contrary to the views of Murphy and Davies, emergentism does not result in a paradigm shift, and only some of the particular views underlying this philosophical position are, to a limited extent, incompatible with some of the components of the prevailing scientific paradigm.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Weak Emergentism
  • Strong Emergentism
  • Scientific Paradigm
  • naturalism
  • Physicalism
Beckermann, Ansgar, Hans Flohr, and Jaegwon Kim. 1992. Emergence or Reduction? Essays on the Prospects of Nonreductive Physicalism. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.

Blitz, David. 1990. “Emergent Evolution and the Level Structure of Reality.” In Studies on Mario Bunge’s Treatise, edited by Paul Weingartner and Georg J. W. Dorn, pp. 153–69. Amsterdam: Rodopi.

Carruth, Alexander, Sophie Gibb, and John Heil. 2018. Ontology, Modality, and Mind: Themes from the Metaphysics of E. J. Lowe. Oxford University Press.

Clayton, Philip. 2006. Mind and Emergence: From Quantum to Consciousness. Oxford England; New York: Oxford University Press.

Clayton, Philip, and Paul Davies, (eds). 2006. The Re-Emergence of Emergence: The Emergentist Hypothesis from Science to Religion. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Davidson, Donald. 1970. “Mental Events.” Readings in Philosophy of Psychology 1: 107–119.

Godfrey-Smith, Peter. 2003. Theory and Reality: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Hempel, Carl G., and Paul Oppenheim. 1948. “Studies in the Logic of Explanation.” Philosophy of Science 15 (2): 135–175.

Humphreys, Paul. 1997. “How Properties Emerge.” Philosophy of Science 64 (1): 1–17.

Kim, Jaegwon. 1993. Supervenience and Mind: Selected Philosophical Essays. Edited by Ernest Sosa. New York, NY, USA: Cambridge University Press.

Lewis, David. 1986. On the Plurality of Worlds. Oxford: Blackwell.

Lewtas, Patrick. 2013. “Emergence and Consciousness.” Philosophy 88 (4): 527–553.

McDowell, John. 2008. “Responses.” In John McDowell: Experience, Norm, and Nature, edited by Jakob Lindgaard, 200–269. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.

McLaughlin, Brian, and Karen Bennett. 2018. “Supervenience.” In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, edited by Edward N. Zalta, Winter 2018. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2018/entries/supervenience/.

Murphy, Nancey. 2010. “Divine Action, Emergence, and Scientific Explanation.” In The Cambridge Companion to Science and Religion, edited by Peter Harrison, 244–59. Cambridge University Press.

O’Connor, Timothy, and Christopher Franklin. 2018. “Free Will.” In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, edited by Edward N. Zalta, Fall 2018. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2018/entries/freewill/.

O’Connor, Timothy, and Hong Yu Wong. 2005. “The Metaphysics of Emergence.” Noûs 39 (4): 658–678.

O’Connor, Timothy, and Hong Yu Wong. 2015. “Emergent Properties.” In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, edited by Edward N. Zalta, Summer 2015. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2015/entries/properties-emergent/.

Papineau, David. 2016. “Naturalism.” In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, edited by Edward N. Zalta, Winter 2016. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2016/entries/naturalism/.

Plantinga, Alvin. 2008. “What Is ‘Intervention’?” Theology and Science 6 (4): 369–401.

Stanghellini, Giovanni, and Rene Rosfort. 2013. Emotions and Personhood: Exploring Fragility - Making Sense of Vulnerability. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Stenmark, Mikael. 1997. “What Is Scientism?” Religious Studies 33 (1): 15–32.

Stephan, Achim. 1992. “Emergence — A Systematic View on Its Historical Facets.” In Emergence or Reduction? Essays on the Prospects of Nonreductive Physicalism, 25–48. Berlin ; New York: de Gruyter.

Stoljar, Daniel. 2017. “Physicalism.” In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, edited by Edward N. Zalta, Winter 2017. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2017/entries/physicalism/.

Strawson, P. F. 1987. Skepticism and Naturalism: Some Varieties. Reprint edition. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.

Toner, Patrick. 2008. “Emergent Substance.” Philosophical Studies 141 (3): 281–297.

Vintiadis, Elly. 2019. “Emergence.” In The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. https://www.iep.utm.edu/emergenc/.