Macro- versus Micro-Determinism
- 1 June 1986
- journal article
- Published by Cambridge University Press (CUP) in Philosophy of Science
- Vol. 53 (2) , 265-270
- https://doi.org/10.1086/289311
Abstract
Most readers will agree with the starting assumptions of Klee (1984) that contemporary science and philosophy assume a primarily micro-deterministic view of nature–and that this has long been the case, or was at least until the 1970s. (As I will explain later, I think such an assumption has been open to question since the mid-1970s.) Defending a strict micro-determinism, Klee argues that concepts of emergence that seemingly are opposed to micro-determinist doctrine can be shown, on analysis, to be ultimately consistent with a thoroughgoing philosophy of micro-determinism. An exception is made, however, in the case of my own view, labeled “direct macro-determinism,” which he describes as “ultimately more troublesome” but then disposes of as being based on “simplistic analogies” and “metaphors” and “too weak to be conclusive.”Keywords
This publication has 4 references indexed in Scilit:
- Micro-Determinism and Concepts of EmergencePhilosophy of Science, 1984
- Consciousness in Contemporary PsychologyAnnual Review of Psychology, 1980
- What the mind's eye tells the mind's brain: A critique of mental imagery.Psychological Bulletin, 1973
- A modified concept of consciousness.Psychological Review, 1969