Foundations of Science最新文献

Language not only reflects and cocreates social universes but can also be and is performative regarding the planetary common good, e.g., through international treaties and agreements. This paper investigates the rationale and feasibility of altering the language used by Glasgow Climate Pact to a posthuman mode that addresses the issue of more-than-human inequality by becoming inclusive toward nonhuman actors, and presents a selection of edited excerpts. The main findings state that (1) the language of the Glasgow Climate Pact is inadequate concerning its expected agency, (2) the reasons for this include its anthropocentrism, capitalocentrism and technocentrism, and (3) it is possible to rephrase the Glasgow Climate Pact and similar documents to address the diagnosed problems in a radically inclusive way. This paper represents a starting point for a discussion on the interrelations between climate and language and on the importance of language used by policy documents in the optics of climate action.

The foundations of biology have been a topic of debate for the past few decades. The traditional perspective of the Modern Synthesis, which portrays organisms as passive entities with a limited explanatory role in evolutionary theory, is giving way to a new paradigm where organisms are recognized as active agents, actively shaping their own phenotypic traits for adaptive goals. Within this context, this article raises the question of whether contemporary biological theory is undergoing a cognitive revolution. This inquiry can be approached in two ways: from a theoretical standpoint, exploring the centrality of the cognitive sciences in current theoretical biology; and from a historical perspective, examining the resemblance between the current state of theoretical biology and the Cognitive Revolution of the mid-twentieth century. Both inquiries yield affirmative answers, though important nuances will be emphasized. The cognitive sciences’ explanatory framework is employed to elucidate the agentic characteristics of organisms, establishing a clear parallelism between the Cognitive Revolution and the present state of theoretical biology.

The problem of explaining color perception has fascinated painters, philosophers and scientists throughout the history. In many cases, the ideas and discoveries about color perception in one of these categories influenced the others, thus resulting in one of the most remarkable cross-fertilization of human thought. At the end of the nineteenth century, two models stood out as the most convincing ones: Young-Helmholtz’s trichromacy on one side, and Hering’s opponency on the other side. The former was mainly supported by painters and scientists, although with some noticeable exceptions as, e.g., Otto Runge, while the majority of philosophers supported the latter. These two apparently incompatible models were proven to be two complementary parts of the hugely complex chain of events which leads to human color perception. Recently, a rigorous mathematical theory able to incorporate both trichromacy and opponency has been developed thanks to the use of the language and tools of quantum information. In this paper, we discuss the placement of this model within the philosophical theories about color.

It is widely believed that mathematics carries a substantial part of the explanatory burden in science. However, mathematics can also play important heuristic roles of a different kind, being a source of new ideas and approaches, allowing us to build toy models, enhancing expressive power and providing fruitful conceptualizations. In this paper, we focus on the application of dynamical systems theory (DST) within the extended cognition (EC) field of cognitive science, considering this case study to be a good illustration of a general phenomenon. In the paper, we justify both a negative and a positive claim. The negative claim is that dynamical systems theory hardly plays any explanatory role in EC research. We justify our claim by analyzing several accounts of the explanatory role of mathematics and stressing the way mathematical arguments are used in explanations. Our positive claim is that even though, for now, DST has no explanatory power in many of the EC approaches, it still plays an important heuristic role there. In particular, using mathematical notions improves the expressive power of the language and gives a sense of understanding of the phenomena under investigation. The case study of EC allows us to identify and analyze this important role of mathematics, which seems to be neglected in contemporary discussions.

The vision of integrating artificial intelligence in education is part of an ongoing push for harnessing digital solutions to improve teaching and learning. Drawing from Jasanoff (Future imperfect: Science, technology, and the imaginations of modernity. In S. Jasanoff, & S. H. Kim (Eds.), Dreamscapes of modernity: Sociotechnical imaginaries and the fabrication of power (pp. 1–33). The University of Chicago Press, 2015. 10.7208/9780226276663) and Hasse (Socratic ignorance in processes of learning with technology. In H. Bound, A. Edwards, & A. Chia (Eds.), Workplace learning for changing social and economic circumstances (pp. 76–90). Routledge, 2023), this paper deliberates on how sociotechnical imaginaries are interrelated to the implications of new technologies, such as AI, in education. Complicating Hasses’s (Socratic ignorance in processes of learning with technology. In H. Bound, A. Edwards, & A. Chia (Eds.), Workplace learning for changing social and economic circumstances (pp. 76–90). Routledge, 2023) call for the development of Socratic ignorance to consider our predispositions about new technologies and open new prospects of thought, this paper revisits postphenomenology (Ihde, Technology and the lifeworld: From garden to earth. Indiana University Press, 1990; Ihde, Postphenomenology: Essays in the postmodern context. Northwestern University Press, 1993; Ihde, Postphenomenology and technoscience. The Peking University lectures. State University of New York Press, 2009) and Feenberg’s (Critical theory of technology, Oxford University Press, 1991; Between reason and experience, MIT Press, 2010; Techne: Res Philos Technol 24:27–40, 2020) critical constructivist theories. While embracing the notion of Socratic ignorance, this paper stresses the importance of developing a nuanced understanding of technology that realizes its lack of neutrality and supports the creation of a deeper understanding of how knowledge is produced, deployed, and interpreted in the digital age. Thus, this paper argues that an amalgam of Hasse’s call for advancing Socratic ignorance combined with postphenomenology and critical constructivism can support students in developing a critical understanding of technology and opening new landscapes of imaginaries.

Abstract

Recent developments in artificial intelligence urge clarification of its ethical and legal status. The issue revolves around the concept of subjectness, distinguishing active and responsible conduct from inert performance. We analyze this notion from a physical viewpoint, building on the quantum-theoretic refinement of the concept of uncertainty into quantum and classical types: quantum uncertainty refers to an objective freedom to construct the future, while classical uncertainty denotes subjective ignorance of present states of nature. Subjectness of intelligence is then defined by the kind of uncertainty it is capable to resolve. To analyze different aspects of intelligence, quantum-inspired definitions of decision, subjectness, originality, and meaning are introduced on this basis. These concepts are first calibrated on natural intelligence and then applied to artificial systems, classified as classical and quantum. Classical AI then appears fundamentally alien to subjectness due to its algorithmic nature, limited to the resolution of classical uncertainty. Quantum AI, in contrast, breaks this limit by hosting some degree of proto-subjectness on the level of elementary particles, involved in its operation. Fundamentally, our approach tracks alternative views on subjectness of intelligence to the interpretations of quantum randomness, identifying both as different sides of the same ethical dilemma. Quantum physics then provides fertile ground for possible solutions, aligned with Eastern and Western views on freedom and constraint, subject and context in social life. These results offer a scientific approach to the controversial challenges of socio-technological development, integrating physical and humanitarian perspectives.

The article focusses on grey system theory and its methodological foundations. Key topics include: axiomatisation of the concept of grey, comparison of grey systems theory with fuzzy logic and probabilistic approaches, and methodological development of the systems approach in grey data modelling. The article discusses in detail the challenges of defining grey space, grey functions, and their applications in solving the methodological problems of grey systems theory. The differences between grey systems theory and other analytical methodologies are highlighted, paying attention to the specifics of the data and the research context and epistemological perspective.

In 1976, I met John Bell several times in CERN and we talked about a possible violation of optical theorem, purity tests, EPR paradox, Bell’s inequalities and their violation. In this review, I resume our discussions, and explain how they were related to my earlier research. I also reproduce handwritten notes, which I gave to Bell during our first meeting and a handwritten letter he sent to me in 1982. We have never met again, but I have continued to discuss BI-CHSH inequalities and their violation in several papers. The research stimulated by Bell’s papers and experiments performed to check his inequalities led to several important applications of quantum entanglement in quantum information and quantum technologies. Unfortunately, it led also to extraordinary metaphysical claims and speculations which in our opinion John Bell would not endorse today. BI-CHSH inequalities are violated in physics and in cognitive science, but it neither proved the completeness of quantum mechanics nor its nonlocality. Quantum computing advantage is not due to some magical instantaneous influences between distant physical systems. Therefore one has to be cautious in drawing-far-reaching philosophical conclusions from Bell’s inequalities. The true resource for quantum computing is contextuality and not nonlocality.