Why computational complexity may set impenetrable barriers for epistemic reductionism

IF 1.3 1区 哲学 Q1 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE
Michael H. Herzog, Adrien Doerig, Christian Sachse
{"title":"Why computational complexity may set impenetrable barriers for epistemic reductionism","authors":"Michael H. Herzog, Adrien Doerig, Christian Sachse","doi":"10.1007/s11229-023-04366-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract According to physicalism, everything is physical or metaphysically connected to the physical. If physicalism were true, it seems that we should – in principle – be able to reduce the descriptions and explanations of special sciences to physical ones, for example, explaining biological regularities, via chemistry, by the laws of particle physics. The multiple realization of the property types of the special sciences is often seen to be an obstacle to such epistemic reductions. Here, we introduce another, new argument against epistemic reduction. Based on mathematical complexity, we show that, under certain conditions, there can be “complexity barriers” that make epistemic reduction – in principle – unachievable even if physicalism were true.","PeriodicalId":49452,"journal":{"name":"Synthese","volume":"9 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Synthese","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-023-04366-1","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract According to physicalism, everything is physical or metaphysically connected to the physical. If physicalism were true, it seems that we should – in principle – be able to reduce the descriptions and explanations of special sciences to physical ones, for example, explaining biological regularities, via chemistry, by the laws of particle physics. The multiple realization of the property types of the special sciences is often seen to be an obstacle to such epistemic reductions. Here, we introduce another, new argument against epistemic reduction. Based on mathematical complexity, we show that, under certain conditions, there can be “complexity barriers” that make epistemic reduction – in principle – unachievable even if physicalism were true.
为什么计算复杂性会为认知还原论设置难以逾越的障碍
物理主义认为,一切事物都是物理的,或者在形而上学上与物理相联系。如果物理主义是正确的,似乎我们应该——原则上——能够将特殊科学的描述和解释简化为物理的描述和解释,例如,通过化学,通过粒子物理定律来解释生物规律。特殊科学的属性类型的多重实现常常被看作是这种认识化约的障碍。在这里,我们引入另一个反对认知还原的新论点。基于数学的复杂性,我们表明,在某些条件下,即使物理主义是正确的,原则上也可能存在“复杂性障碍”,使认知还原无法实现。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Synthese
Synthese 管理科学-科学史与科学哲学
CiteScore
3.30
自引率
13.30%
发文量
471
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: Synthese is a philosophy journal focusing on contemporary issues in epistemology, philosophy of science, and related fields. More specifically, we divide our areas of interest into four groups: (1) epistemology, methodology, and philosophy of science, all broadly understood. (2) The foundations of logic and mathematics, where ‘logic’, ‘mathematics’, and ‘foundations’ are all broadly understood. (3) Formal methods in philosophy, including methods connecting philosophy to other academic fields. (4) Issues in ethics and the history and sociology of logic, mathematics, and science that contribute to the contemporary studies Synthese focuses on, as described in (1)-(3) above.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信