Pub Date : 2022-11-07DOI: 10.1080/03080188.2022.2125614
R. van der Merwe
ABSTRACT Stuart Kauffman has, in recent writings, developed a thought-provoking and influential argument for strong emergence. The outcome is his Theory of the Adjacent Possible (TAP). According to TAP, the biosphere constitutes a non-physical domain qualitatively distinct from the physical domain. The biosphere exhibits strongly emergent properties such as agency, meaning, value and creativity that cannot, in principle, be reduced to the physical. In this paper, I argue that TAP includes various (explicit or implicit) metaphysical commitments: commitments to (1) scientific realism, (2) downward causation and teleology, and (3) modal realism. If TAP is to hang together as the kind of robust philosophical thesis it evidently aspires to be, it needs an account – an account that is currently absent – of its metaphysical commitments. It is, however, unclear how such an account can be developed since various dilemmas present themselves when one explores how subscribers to TAP might do so.
{"title":"Stuart Kauffman’s metaphysics of the adjacent possible: a critique","authors":"R. van der Merwe","doi":"10.1080/03080188.2022.2125614","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03080188.2022.2125614","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Stuart Kauffman has, in recent writings, developed a thought-provoking and influential argument for strong emergence. The outcome is his Theory of the Adjacent Possible (TAP). According to TAP, the biosphere constitutes a non-physical domain qualitatively distinct from the physical domain. The biosphere exhibits strongly emergent properties such as agency, meaning, value and creativity that cannot, in principle, be reduced to the physical. In this paper, I argue that TAP includes various (explicit or implicit) metaphysical commitments: commitments to (1) scientific realism, (2) downward causation and teleology, and (3) modal realism. If TAP is to hang together as the kind of robust philosophical thesis it evidently aspires to be, it needs an account – an account that is currently absent – of its metaphysical commitments. It is, however, unclear how such an account can be developed since various dilemmas present themselves when one explores how subscribers to TAP might do so.","PeriodicalId":50352,"journal":{"name":"Interdisciplinary Science Reviews","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2022-11-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47072174","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"综合性期刊","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-10-02DOI: 10.1080/03080188.2022.2124347
I. Morris
ABSTRACT Reviel Netz offers a radically contingent counterfactual history in which the absence of Archimedes would have prevented early modern Europe's scientific revolution and perhaps the nineteenth-century industrial revolution too. I argue that we need to be more explicit about methods in counterfactual arguments. Techniques developed by economic historians and political scientists seem to point toward a more constrained range of possibilities, and also favor assigning more importance to external material forces. Absent Archimedes, I suggest, we would live in a different world from this one, but not very different.
{"title":"Absent Archimedes – what?","authors":"I. Morris","doi":"10.1080/03080188.2022.2124347","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03080188.2022.2124347","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Reviel Netz offers a radically contingent counterfactual history in which the absence of Archimedes would have prevented early modern Europe's scientific revolution and perhaps the nineteenth-century industrial revolution too. I argue that we need to be more explicit about methods in counterfactual arguments. Techniques developed by economic historians and political scientists seem to point toward a more constrained range of possibilities, and also favor assigning more importance to external material forces. Absent Archimedes, I suggest, we would live in a different world from this one, but not very different.","PeriodicalId":50352,"journal":{"name":"Interdisciplinary Science Reviews","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2022-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45900683","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"综合性期刊","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-10-02DOI: 10.1080/03080188.2022.2120236
Dhruv Raina
ABSTRACT This essay engages with some of the central arguments presented in the essay by Reviel Netz. The intention is not to disagree with his arguments but to raise an additional set of questions and salient concerns. The first section discusses the importance of an iterative praxis in the transformation of scientific or mathematical concepts within a school or tradition. In a subsequent section, this is linked with the interpretation of classical texts and the possible sources of anachronism. The essay discusses the multiplicity of genealogies of mathematics and the exact sciences in order to foreground other possible traditions and styles and their role in constituting the identity of the exact sciences. Similarly, the essay closes with a brief discussion of the consequences of recent studies on South Asian history in order to pluralize the narratives of the origins of the exact and modern sciences.
{"title":"One or many? Genealogies of the mathematical sciences","authors":"Dhruv Raina","doi":"10.1080/03080188.2022.2120236","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03080188.2022.2120236","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This essay engages with some of the central arguments presented in the essay by Reviel Netz. The intention is not to disagree with his arguments but to raise an additional set of questions and salient concerns. The first section discusses the importance of an iterative praxis in the transformation of scientific or mathematical concepts within a school or tradition. In a subsequent section, this is linked with the interpretation of classical texts and the possible sources of anachronism. The essay discusses the multiplicity of genealogies of mathematics and the exact sciences in order to foreground other possible traditions and styles and their role in constituting the identity of the exact sciences. Similarly, the essay closes with a brief discussion of the consequences of recent studies on South Asian history in order to pluralize the narratives of the origins of the exact and modern sciences.","PeriodicalId":50352,"journal":{"name":"Interdisciplinary Science Reviews","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2022-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45954409","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"综合性期刊","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-10-02DOI: 10.1080/03080188.2022.2133399
K. Chemla
ABSTRACT This introduction to the issue of Interdisciplinary Science Reviews outlines the rules of the game on which all contributors agreed. Thirteen scholars have responded to a root essay written by Reviel Netz, under the title ‘The Place of Archimedes in World History.’ The introduction outlines the main lines of the arguments they put forward.
{"title":"Thirteen scholars reply to Reviel Netz’s ‘The Place of Archimedes in World History’","authors":"K. Chemla","doi":"10.1080/03080188.2022.2133399","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03080188.2022.2133399","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This introduction to the issue of Interdisciplinary Science Reviews outlines the rules of the game on which all contributors agreed. Thirteen scholars have responded to a root essay written by Reviel Netz, under the title ‘The Place of Archimedes in World History.’ The introduction outlines the main lines of the arguments they put forward.","PeriodicalId":50352,"journal":{"name":"Interdisciplinary Science Reviews","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2022-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44949863","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"综合性期刊","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-10-02DOI: 10.1080/03080188.2022.2108963
F. Jamil Ragep
ABSTRACT The history of mathematics is replete with multidimensionality and multiculturalism. This essay attempts to use the history of astronomy (one of the mathematical sciences) to emphasize the multiple traditions from various cultural zones that contributed to that history. In doing so, it supplements, but also challenges, the more unidimensional story that Reviel Netz puts forth in his own essay on the importance of the Archimedean tradition. Specifically, the essay uses examples from Babylonian, Greek, Indian, and, especially, Islamic astronomy to show how traditions not tied to Archimedes were of major importance on the often circuitous path to modern science. The notion of contingency is also explored, in particular the idea that without Greek mathematics in general, and Archimedes in particular, early modern and modern science might not have been possible. Counter to this, the essay explores other possible scenarios, whereby different mathematical traditions in other cultural settings could have plausibly led to major breakthroughs associated with the scientific revolution.
{"title":"Mathematics, the mathematical sciences, and historical contingency: Some thoughts on reading Netz","authors":"F. Jamil Ragep","doi":"10.1080/03080188.2022.2108963","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03080188.2022.2108963","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The history of mathematics is replete with multidimensionality and multiculturalism. This essay attempts to use the history of astronomy (one of the mathematical sciences) to emphasize the multiple traditions from various cultural zones that contributed to that history. In doing so, it supplements, but also challenges, the more unidimensional story that Reviel Netz puts forth in his own essay on the importance of the Archimedean tradition. Specifically, the essay uses examples from Babylonian, Greek, Indian, and, especially, Islamic astronomy to show how traditions not tied to Archimedes were of major importance on the often circuitous path to modern science. The notion of contingency is also explored, in particular the idea that without Greek mathematics in general, and Archimedes in particular, early modern and modern science might not have been possible. Counter to this, the essay explores other possible scenarios, whereby different mathematical traditions in other cultural settings could have plausibly led to major breakthroughs associated with the scientific revolution.","PeriodicalId":50352,"journal":{"name":"Interdisciplinary Science Reviews","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2022-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47446577","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"综合性期刊","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-10-02DOI: 10.1080/03080188.2022.2108968
G. Lloyd
ABSTRACT The points at which Greek mathematics in general and Archimedes' contributions in particular are exceptional are here assessed by way of a comparison with the extensive evidence from ancient China. While underlining the need for caution concerning the extent to which concrete conclusions are possible, the outcome is broadly to confirm Netz's argument that a key factor in Archimedes' success and influence was the way in which in a social and intellectual environment that favoured debate, he was able to contest an assumption found in both the Platonic and Aristotelian traditions. Where they had imagined a sharp division (albeit differently defined) between what they assigned to ‘physics’ and to ‘mathematics’ respectively, Archimedes showed how those two inquiries could be treated as complementary to one another, thereby opening up the possibility of new styles of physical demonstration.
{"title":"The problems of exceptionality: The case of Archimedes and the Greeks","authors":"G. Lloyd","doi":"10.1080/03080188.2022.2108968","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03080188.2022.2108968","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The points at which Greek mathematics in general and Archimedes' contributions in particular are exceptional are here assessed by way of a comparison with the extensive evidence from ancient China. While underlining the need for caution concerning the extent to which concrete conclusions are possible, the outcome is broadly to confirm Netz's argument that a key factor in Archimedes' success and influence was the way in which in a social and intellectual environment that favoured debate, he was able to contest an assumption found in both the Platonic and Aristotelian traditions. Where they had imagined a sharp division (albeit differently defined) between what they assigned to ‘physics’ and to ‘mathematics’ respectively, Archimedes showed how those two inquiries could be treated as complementary to one another, thereby opening up the possibility of new styles of physical demonstration.","PeriodicalId":50352,"journal":{"name":"Interdisciplinary Science Reviews","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2022-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49444313","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"综合性期刊","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-10-02DOI: 10.1080/03080188.2022.2108962
P. D. Napolitani
ABSTRACT This article argues that the recovery of Greek mathematics and particularly the mathematics of Archimedes in the course of the twelfth to sixteenth centuries was not the only factor that brought about the creation of modern mathematics in the course of the seventeenth. On the contrary, the work of mathematicians such as Francesco Maurolico, Luca Valerio, and Bonaventura Cavalieri, or of scientists such as Guidobaldo dal Monte and Galileo, was impeded by their attempts to hold to the paradigm of Greek mathematics.
{"title":"History and mythography: On the role of Archimedean mathematics in the Renaissance","authors":"P. D. Napolitani","doi":"10.1080/03080188.2022.2108962","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03080188.2022.2108962","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article argues that the recovery of Greek mathematics and particularly the mathematics of Archimedes in the course of the twelfth to sixteenth centuries was not the only factor that brought about the creation of modern mathematics in the course of the seventeenth. On the contrary, the work of mathematicians such as Francesco Maurolico, Luca Valerio, and Bonaventura Cavalieri, or of scientists such as Guidobaldo dal Monte and Galileo, was impeded by their attempts to hold to the paradigm of Greek mathematics.","PeriodicalId":50352,"journal":{"name":"Interdisciplinary Science Reviews","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2022-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46610035","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"综合性期刊","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-10-02DOI: 10.1080/03080188.2022.2108965
W. Scheidel
ABSTRACT This paper responds to Reviel Netz’s attempt to link modernizing development in Europe to the legacy of the ancient Greek mathematician Archimedes. It defends the value of the kind of counterfactual reasoning that underpins Netz’s effort and contextualizes his argument within the broader context of the debate about the origins of the ‘Great Divergence’ between Europe and other parts of the world. The nexus between Archimedean insights and the development of the modern steam engine posited by Netz receives critical attention: we must ask to what extent counterfactual alternative modes of modernization might allow us to dissociate modernization from ancient Greek legacies. Finally, this paper draws attention to the political implications of presenting an exceptionalist vision of developmental features that are held to be uniquely associated with ancient Greece and early modern Europe, concluding that special care needs to be taken in employing this contentious perspective.
{"title":"Non-Archimedean modernities","authors":"W. Scheidel","doi":"10.1080/03080188.2022.2108965","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03080188.2022.2108965","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This paper responds to Reviel Netz’s attempt to link modernizing development in Europe to the legacy of the ancient Greek mathematician Archimedes. It defends the value of the kind of counterfactual reasoning that underpins Netz’s effort and contextualizes his argument within the broader context of the debate about the origins of the ‘Great Divergence’ between Europe and other parts of the world. The nexus between Archimedean insights and the development of the modern steam engine posited by Netz receives critical attention: we must ask to what extent counterfactual alternative modes of modernization might allow us to dissociate modernization from ancient Greek legacies. Finally, this paper draws attention to the political implications of presenting an exceptionalist vision of developmental features that are held to be uniquely associated with ancient Greece and early modern Europe, concluding that special care needs to be taken in employing this contentious perspective.","PeriodicalId":50352,"journal":{"name":"Interdisciplinary Science Reviews","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2022-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46550720","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"综合性期刊","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-10-02DOI: 10.1080/03080188.2022.2130595
Agathe Keller
ABSTRACT This essay argues against a history of mathematics that celebrates a unique Greek ‘outlier’ in world history, while raising the question of the new type of histories of mathematics that we should write today. Taking examples from the history of mathematical sources in Sanskrit and histories of mathematics written in South Asia, this essay deconstructs some assumptions behind narratives of Greek and European exceptionalism. In particular, it challenges the notion that ancient Greece possessed a unique democratic culture that fostered scientific debate and that only Greece possessed brash authors able to challenge common sense. The essay provides a reflection on the political histories that European exceptionalism – in particular regarding mathematics – has directly or indirectly shaped.
{"title":"Navigating the sea of histories of mathematics","authors":"Agathe Keller","doi":"10.1080/03080188.2022.2130595","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03080188.2022.2130595","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This essay argues against a history of mathematics that celebrates a unique Greek ‘outlier’ in world history, while raising the question of the new type of histories of mathematics that we should write today. Taking examples from the history of mathematical sources in Sanskrit and histories of mathematics written in South Asia, this essay deconstructs some assumptions behind narratives of Greek and European exceptionalism. In particular, it challenges the notion that ancient Greece possessed a unique democratic culture that fostered scientific debate and that only Greece possessed brash authors able to challenge common sense. The essay provides a reflection on the political histories that European exceptionalism – in particular regarding mathematics – has directly or indirectly shaped.","PeriodicalId":50352,"journal":{"name":"Interdisciplinary Science Reviews","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2022-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43389412","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"综合性期刊","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-10-02DOI: 10.1080/03080188.2022.2109100
R. Netz
ABSTRACT Did science, as we know it, have to be? The article explores a possible response in the negative, organized around a specific contingency: that of Greek mathematics or, even more specifically, that of the mathematics of the generation of Archimedes. The argument is that (1) Greek mathematics, seen against a cross-cultural comparison, is an anomaly, (2) the scientific revolution, as it in fact unfolded, was directly shaped by the anomaly of Greek mathematics, and (3) it is not clear that, absent Greek mathematics, an equivalent scientific revolution would have taken place. The argument is developed in some detail concerning the history of ancient Greek science, but more is said on the inevitably philosophical questions of counterfactuals in history and on the specific question of the contingency of science.
{"title":"The place of Archimedes in world history","authors":"R. Netz","doi":"10.1080/03080188.2022.2109100","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03080188.2022.2109100","url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Did science, as we know it, have to be? The article explores a possible response in the negative, organized around a specific contingency: that of Greek mathematics or, even more specifically, that of the mathematics of the generation of Archimedes. The argument is that (1) Greek mathematics, seen against a cross-cultural comparison, is an anomaly, (2) the scientific revolution, as it in fact unfolded, was directly shaped by the anomaly of Greek mathematics, and (3) it is not clear that, absent Greek mathematics, an equivalent scientific revolution would have taken place. The argument is developed in some detail concerning the history of ancient Greek science, but more is said on the inevitably philosophical questions of counterfactuals in history and on the specific question of the contingency of science.","PeriodicalId":50352,"journal":{"name":"Interdisciplinary Science Reviews","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1,"publicationDate":"2022-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43394302","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"综合性期刊","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：