Open Access Open Access  Restricted Access Subscription Access

Physicalist Theories as Science and Physicalist Theories as Philosophy


Affiliations
1 Department of Academic Affairs, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, USA., United States
 

Physicists and philosophers sometimes claim that all of the phenomena of the universe, as in “theories of everything,” are or should be explainable in terms of the elementary constituents of matter or elementary particles; I seek to show that physicalist theories that attempt to reduce “higher order” phenomena in chemistry, bio-chemistry, biology, and the neuroscience of mind, brain, and consciousness to explanations involving elementary particles are either untestable or not empirically valid; moreover, I seek to show that there are successful cases of reduction in science, such as in chemistry, bio-chemistry, neuroscience, and evolutionary biology including Darwinism, that do not necessarily involve or imply “physicalism” or the tenets of physicalist theories; I also seek to show that physicalist theories undermine and do not address the empirical and theoretical content of successful discoveries and theories at different levels of reality, and within and across different branches of science.

Keywords

Elementary Particles, Penrose, Roger, Reductionism, Neuroscience, Written Languages, Moore’s Law, Graphical User Interfaces.
User
Notifications
Font Size


  • Physicalist Theories as Science and Physicalist Theories as Philosophy

Abstract Views: 215  |  PDF Views: 0

Authors

Christopher Portosa Stevens
Department of Academic Affairs, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, USA., United States

Abstract


Physicists and philosophers sometimes claim that all of the phenomena of the universe, as in “theories of everything,” are or should be explainable in terms of the elementary constituents of matter or elementary particles; I seek to show that physicalist theories that attempt to reduce “higher order” phenomena in chemistry, bio-chemistry, biology, and the neuroscience of mind, brain, and consciousness to explanations involving elementary particles are either untestable or not empirically valid; moreover, I seek to show that there are successful cases of reduction in science, such as in chemistry, bio-chemistry, neuroscience, and evolutionary biology including Darwinism, that do not necessarily involve or imply “physicalism” or the tenets of physicalist theories; I also seek to show that physicalist theories undermine and do not address the empirical and theoretical content of successful discoveries and theories at different levels of reality, and within and across different branches of science.

Keywords


Elementary Particles, Penrose, Roger, Reductionism, Neuroscience, Written Languages, Moore’s Law, Graphical User Interfaces.

References