Emergence and reduction in chemistry: Ontological or epistemological concepts?

Synthese 155 (3):337-343 (2007)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

In this paper I argue that the ontological interpretation of the concepts of reduction and emergence is often misleading in the philosophy of science and should nearly always be eschewed in favor of an epistemological interpretation. As a paradigm case, an example is drawn from the philosophy of chemistry to illustrate the drawbacks of “ontological reduction” and “ontological emergence,” and the virtues of an epistemological interpretation of these concepts

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,219

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

The autonomy of chemistry: old and new problems. [REVIEW]Rein Vihalemm - 2010 - Foundations of Chemistry 13 (2):97-107.
Ontological reduction: A comment on Lombardi and labarca.Paul Needham - 2006 - Foundations of Chemistry 8 (1):73-80.
Leibniz on Concept and Substance.Michael K. Shim - 2006 - International Philosophical Quarterly 46 (3):309-325.
The ontological autonomy of the chemical world.Olimpia Lombardi & Martín Labarca - 2004 - Foundations of Chemistry 7 (2):125-148.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
312 (#61,746)

6 months
42 (#89,205)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

References found in this work

Physicalism, or Something Near Enough.Jaegwon Kim - 2005 - Princeton University Press.
Concepts of supervenience.Jaegwon Kim - 1984 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 45 (December):153-76.
Genetics and Reductionism.Sahotra Sarkar - 1998 - Cambridge University Press.

View all 16 references / Add more references