The Impact of the Paradigm of Complexity On the Foundational Frameworks of Biology and Cognitive Science

Abstract

According to the traditional nomological-deductive methodology of physics and chemistry [Hempel and Oppenheim, 1948], explaining a phenomenon means subsuming it under a law. Logic becomes then the glue of explanation and laws the primary explainers. Thus, the scientific study of a system would consist in the development of a logically sound model of it, once the relevant observables (state variables) are identified and the general laws governing their change (expressed as differential equations, state transition rules, maximization/minimization principles,. . . ) are well determined, together with the initial or boundary conditions for each particular case. Often this also involves making a set of assumptions about the elementary components of the system (e.g., their structural and dynamic properties) and modes of local interaction. In this framework, predictability becomes the main goal and that is why research is carried out through the construction of accurate mathematical models. Thus, physics and chemistry have made most progress so far by focusing on systems that, either due to their intrinsic properties or to the conditions in which they are investigated, allow for very strong simplifying assumptions, under which, nevertheless, those highly idealized models of reality are deemed to be in good correspondence with reality itself. Despite the enormous success that this methodology has had, the study of living and cognitive phenomena had to follow a very different road, because these phenomena are produced by systems whose underlying material structure and organization do not permit such crude approximations. Seen from the perspective of physics or chemistry, biological and cognitive systems are made of an enormous number of parts or elements interacting in non-linear and selective ways, which makes very difficult their tractability through mathematical models. In addition, many of those interacting elements are hierarchically organized, in a way that the “macroscopic” (observable) parts behave according to rules that cannot be, in practice, derived from simple principles at the level of their “microscopic” dynamics..

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,164

External links

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

Through your library

  • Only published works are available at libraries.

Similar books and articles

Complexity: hierarchical structures and scaling in physics.R. Badii - 1997 - New York: Cambridge University Press. Edited by A. Politi.
Physical Methodology for Economic Systems Modeling.I. G. Tuluzov & S. I. Melnyk - 2010 - Electronic Journal of Theoretical Physics (EJTP) 7 (24):57-78.
Gould on laws in biological science.Lee Mcintyre - 1997 - Biology and Philosophy 12 (3):357-367.
Towards a model of life and cognition.Nagarjuna G. - forthcoming - In B. V. Srikantan (ed.), Foundations of Science. Center for Studies in Civilizations.
Modelling the noncomputational mind: Reply to Litch.Terence E. Horgan - 1997 - Philosophical Psychology 10 (3):365-371.

Analytics

Added to PP
2010-12-22

Downloads
113 (#151,472)

6 months
6 (#403,662)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?