Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T23:19:04.464Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Cognitive Emergence

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2022

Fritz Rohrlich
Fritz Rohrlich*
Affiliation:
Syracuse University
*
†Department of Physics, Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY 13244–1130; e-mail: [email protected].
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Examination of attempts at theory reduction (S to T) shows that a process of cognitive emergence is involved in which concepts of S, Cs, emerge from T. This permits the ‘bridge laws’ to be stated. These are not in conflict with incommensurability of the Cs with the CT. Cognitive emergence may occur asymptotically or because of similarities of mathematical expressions; it is not necessarily holistic. Mereologically and nonmereologically related theory pairs are considered. Examples are chosen from physics. An important distinction is made between ‘theory reduction’ and ‘reductive explanation’.

Type
Symposium: Emergence and Supervenience: Alternatives to Unity by Reduction
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 64 , Issue S4: Supplement. Proceedings of the 1996 Biennial Meetings of the Philosophy of Science Association. Part II: Symposia Papers Dec., 1997 , 1997 , pp. S346 - S358
Copyright
Copyright © Philosophy of Science Association 1997

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

‡

The author is grateful to several unknown referees for helpful suggestions.

References

Batterman, R. W. (1995), “Theories Between Theories: Asymptotic Limiting Intertheoretic Relations”, Synthese 103: 171–201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brush, S. (1976), “Statistical Mechanics and Philosophy of Science: Some Historical Notes”, in F. Suppe and P. D. Asquith (eds.), PSA 1976, v.2. East Lansing, MI: Philosophy of Science Association, pp 551–584.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dresden, M. (1974), “Reflections on Fundamentality and Complexity”, in Enz, C. and Mehra, J. (eds.), Physical Reality and Mathematical Description. Dordrecht: Reidel, pp. 133–166.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huang, K. (1963), Statistical Mechanics. New York: John Wiley.Google Scholar
Humphreys, P. (1997), “Emergence, Not Supervenience”, Philosophy of Science 64 (Proceedings): this issue.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuhn, T. (1962), The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Morgan, L. (1923), Emergent Evolution. New York: Henry Holt.Google Scholar
Nagel, E. (1961), The Structure of Science. New York: Harcourt, Brace and World.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rohrlich, F. (1988), “Pluralistic Ontology and Theory Reduction in the Physical Sciences”, British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 39: 295–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rohrlich, F. (1989), “The Logic of Reduction: The Case of Gravitation”, Foundations of Physics 19: 1151–1170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rohrlich, F. (1994), “Scientific Explanation: From Covering Law to Covering Theory”, in Hull, D., Forbes, M., and Burian, R. M. (eds.), PSA 1994, v.l. East Lansing, MI: Philosophy of Science Association, pp. 69–77.Google Scholar
Sankey, H. (1994), The Incommensurability Thesis. Aldershot: Avebury.Google Scholar
Schaffner, K. F. (1967), “Approaches to Reduction”, Philosophy of Science 34: 137–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shimony, A. (1993), Search for a Naturalistic World View, 2 vols. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sklar, L. (1993), Physics and Chance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suppe, F. (1977), The Structure of Scientific Theories. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
Wimsatt, W. C. (1997), “Emergence as Non-Aggregativity and the Biases of Reductionism”, in Taylor, P. J. and Haila, J. (eds.), Natural Contradictions: Perspectives on Ecology and Change. Albany: State University of New York Press, in press.Google Scholar