Is There Downward Causation in Chemistry?

Hendry, Robin Findlay

doi:10.1007/1-4020-3261-7_9

Cited by 37 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…According to Mill, homopathic cause would be a mechanical causality which is in line with the principle of Composition of Causes while heteropatic causality would refer rather to a more chemical causality characterized by a violation of this principle [29]. Bedau (1997), Clayton and Davies (2006) and Francescotti (2007) explained that the notion of emergence[30] refers implicitly to a downward causation that can be found in the Millian framework (Stephan, 2002;Hendry, 2006). More precisely, Jean (1997) defined the heteropathic causality as downward causation:…”

Section: 1mentioning

confidence: 99%

Duality of knowledge, singularity of method

Schınckus

Akdere

2018

JABES

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose How a micro-founded discipline such as economics could deal with the increasing global economic reality? This question has been asked frequently since the last economic crisis that appeared in 2008. In this challenging context, some commentators have turned their attention to a new area of knowledge coming from physics: econophysics which mainly focuses on a macro-analysis of economic systems. By showing that concepts used by econophysicists are consistent with an existing economic knowledge (developed by J.S. Mill), the purpose of this paper is to claim that an interdisciplinary perspective is possible between these two communities. Design/methodology/approach The authors propose a historical and conceptual analysis of the key concept of emergence to emphasize the potential bridge between econophysics and economics. Findings Six methodological arguments will be developed in order to show the existence of conceptual bridges as a necessary condition for the elaboration of a common language between economists and econophysics which would not be superfluous, in this challenging context, to clarify the growing complexity of economic phenomena. Originality/value Although the economics and econophysics study same the complex economic phenomena, very few collaborations exist between them. This paper paves a conceptual/methodological path for more collaboration between the two fields.

show abstract

Section: 1mentioning

confidence: 99%

Duality of knowledge, singularity of method

Schınckus

Akdere

2018

JABES

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Del mismo modo, Scerri y McIntyre (1997) se preguntan si la química superviene a la física analizando, en particular, la propiedad 'olor'. Por su parte, Hendry (2006) evalúa la posibilidad de causación descendente en química, mientras que Bishop (2005) considera que una adecuada elucidación del concepto de emergencia permite vincular apropiadamente la mecánica cuántica y la química molecular.…”

Section: El Marco De La Discusión: La Relación Entre Química Y Físicaunclassified

Acerca del status ontológico de las entidades químicas: el caso de los orbitales atómicos DOI:10.5007/1808-1711.2010v14n3p309

Labarca

Lombardi

2011

Principia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of the present paper is to analyze the problem of the relationship between chemistry and physics, by focusing on the widely discussed case of the atomic orbitals. We will begin by remembering the difference between the physical and the chemical interpretation of the concept of orbital. Then, we will refer to the claim made in 1999 that atomic orbitals have been directly imaged for the first time. On this basis, we will analyze the problem from a new approach, by comparing the concept of orbital used in physics with the concept of orbital used in chemistry. Such an analysis will allow us to argue for an ontological pluralism that admits the coexistence of different ontologies without priorities or metaphysical privileges. From this philosophical framework, the concepts of chemical orbital and physical orbital correspond to two different ontologies. As a consequence, chemical orbitals are real entities belonging to the ontology of molecular chemistry, and can be observed like any other entity not belonging to the quantum mechanical ontology.

show abstract

“…Physically, the causal impact of system A on O happens between the microstates of A and X, such as the kinetic or quantum level interactions between substrate molecules and enzymes. The relation of observation supervenes on the microlevels in the sense that the molecular shape of the active site of the enzyme (which is an emergent property of the quantum level [67][68]) fits into the molecular shape of the substrate. The relation between the two levels becomes physically explicit in the induced fit process in which the two sides adapt to each other.…”

Section: Evolving Functions and Maximum Entropy Productionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Entropy, Function and Evolution: Naturalizing Peircian Semiosis

Herrmann‐Pillath

2010

Entropy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:In the biosemiotic literature there is a tension between the naturalistic reference to biological processes and the category of 'meaning' which is central in the concept of semiosis. A crucial term bridging the two dimensions is 'information'. I argue that the tension can be resolved if we reconsider the relation between information and entropy and downgrade the conceptual centrality of Shannon information in the standard approach to entropy and information. Entropy comes into full play if semiosis is seen as a physical process involving causal interactions between physical systems with functions. Functions emerge from evolutionary processes, as conceived in recent philosophical contributions to teleosemantics. In this context, causal interactions can be interpreted in a dual mode, namely as standard causation and as an observation. Thus, a function appears to be the interpretant in the Peircian triadic notion of the sign. Recognizing this duality, the Gibbs/Jaynes notion of entropy is added to the picture, which shares an essential conceptual feature with the notion of function: Both concepts are part of a physicalist ontology, but are observer relative at the same time. Thus, it is possible to give an account of semiosis within the entropy framework without limiting the notion of entropy to the Shannon measure, but taking full account of the thermodynamic definition. A central feature of this approach is the conceptual linkage between the evolution of functions and maximum entropy production. I show how we can conceive of the semiosphere as a fundamental physical phenomenon. Following an early contribution by Hayek, in conclusion I argue that the category of 'meaning' supervenes on nested functions in semiosis, and has a function itself, namely to enable functional self-reference, which otherwise mainfests functional break-down because of standard set-theoretic paradoxes. OPEN ACCESSEntropy 2010, 12 198 Keywords: information; functions; Jaynes' approach to entropy; observer relativity; maximum entropy production; evolution of functions; Peirce's concept of semiosis; semiosphere Even at the purely phenomenological level, entropy is an anthropomorphic concept. E.T. Jaynes

show abstract

Is There Downward Causation in Chemistry?

Cited by 37 publications

References 18 publications

Duality of knowledge, singularity of method

Duality of knowledge, singularity of method

Acerca del status ontológico de las entidades químicas: el caso de los orbitales atómicos DOI:10.5007/1808-1711.2010v14n3p309

Entropy, Function and Evolution: Naturalizing Peircian Semiosis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About