14065 research outputs found
Sort by
A response to Mary
Full text linkFrank Jackson raised a formidable challenge against physicalism, in the form of a fable: Mary comprehends the physics of color vision but has never seen red; when she does, she learns what red looks like. Hence there is knowledge that transcends what is accessible from a purely third-person perspective. We point out that this can be true without contradicting physicalism. The solution of the apparent paradox is to notice that physicalism implies that knowledge must be physically realized. In turn, this implies the existence of (physical) reflexive knowledge, distinct from the knowledge obtained from a third-person perspective
AI4Science and the Context Distinction
Full text link“AI4Science” refers to the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in scientific research. As AI systems become more widely used in science, we need guidelines for when such uses are acceptable and when they are unacceptable. To that end, I propose that the distinction between the context of discovery and the context of justification, which comes from philosophy of science, may provide a preliminary but still useful guideline for acceptable uses of AI in science. Given that AI systems used in scientific research are black boxes, for the most part, we should use such systems in the context of discovery but not in the context of justification. The former refers to processes of idea generation, which may be unproblematically opaque whether they occur in human brains or artificial neural networks, whereas the latter refers to scientific methods by which scientific ideas are tested, confirmed, verified, and justified, which should be transparent
Tatiana Ehrenfest-Afanassjewa’s Contributions to Dimensional Analysis
Full text linkTatiana Ehrenfest-Afanassjewa was an important physicist, mathematician, and educator in 20th century Europe. While some of her work has recently undergone reevaluation, little has been said regarding her groundbreaking work on dimensional analysis. This, in part, reflects an unfortunate dismissal of her interventions in such foundational debates by her contemporaries. In spite of this, her work on the generalized theory of homogeneous equations provides a mathematically sound foundation for dimensional analysis and has found some appreciation and development. It remains to provide a historical account of Ehrenfest-Afanassjewa's use of the theory of homogeneous functions to ground (and limit) dimensional analysis. We take as a central focus Ehrenfest-Afanassjewa's contributions to a debate on the foundations of dimensional analysis started by physicist Richard Tolman in 1914. I go on to suggest an interpretation of the more thoroughgoing intervention Ehrenfest-Afanassjewa makes in 1926 based on this earlier context, especially her limited rehabilitation of a "theory of similitude" in contradistinction to dimensional analysis. It is shown that Ehrenfest-Afanassjewa has made foundational contributions to the mathematical foundations and methodology of dimensional analysis, our conception of the relation between constants and laws, and our understanding of the quantitative nature of physics, which remain of value
Not Quite Killing It: Black Hole Evaporation, Global Energy, and De-Idealization
Full text linkA family of arguments for black hole evaporation relies on conservation laws, defined through symmetries represented by Killing vector fields which exist globally or asymptotically. However, these symmetries often rely on the idealizations of stationarity and asymptotic flatness, respectively. In non-stationary or non-asymptotically-flat spacetimes where realistic black holes evaporate, the requisite Killing fields typically do not exist. Can we 'de-idealize' these idealizations, and subsequently the associated arguments for black hole evaporation? Here, I critically examine the strategy of using 'approximately Killing' fields to de-idealize black hole spacetimes and approximately extend conservation laws to non-idealized cases. I argue that this approach encounters significant challenges, undermining the use of these idealizations to justify the evaporation of realistic -- rather than idealized -- black holes, and raising questions about the justified use of such idealizations
Noisy Nocebo Harms: A Two-Part Problem for Active Drug Surveillance
Full text linkPost-market pharmaceutical surveillance or ‘pharmacovigilance’ relies on the reporting of suspected adverse drug reactions to regulatory databases. Recently, more ‘active’ methods that directly involve patients in identifying and reporting suspected adverse drug reactions have been suggested. This is different than traditional ‘passive’ methods, e.g., using databases without contacting patients directly. Though there are benefits to active pharmacovigilance, it is not without its potential risks. Here I highlight one of those risks – the nocebo effect. Nocebo effects are harms that are thought to arise by conditioning or negative expectation. If a patient engaged in active pharmacovigilance is improperly motivated to seek out and report suspected adverse drug reactions, nocebo harms can occur. Not only is this a bioethical concern about harm, but it is also an epistemic or data-quality problem. Since nocebo effects are not due to the pharmacological properties of the drugs under investigation, nocebo effects reported as suspected adverse drug reactions constitute false positives in these databases
Decoherence and Probability
Full text linkOne cannot justifiably presuppose the physical salience of structures derived via decoherence theory based upon an entirely uninterpreted use of the quantum formalism. Non-probabilistic accounts of the emergence of probability via decoherence are unconvincing. An alternative account of the emergence of probability involves the combination of a partially interpreted decoherence model and an averaging of observables with respect to a positive-definite quasi-probability function and neglect of terms . Our analysis delimits the context in which the combination of decoherence and a semi-classical averaging allows us to recover a classical probability model within an emergent coarse-grained description
Beyond biological and social normativity: Varieties of norm deviation and the justification for intervention
Full text linkThe most common theoretical approaches to defining mental disorder are naturalism, normativism, and hybridism. Naturalism and normativism are often portrayed as diametrically opposed, with naturalism grounded in objective science and normativism grounded in social convention and values. Hybridism is seen as a way of combining the two. However, all three approaches share a common feature in that they conceive of mental disorders as deviations from norms. Naturalism concerns biological norms; normativism concerns social norms; and hybridism, both biological and social norms. This raises the following two questions: (a) Are biological and social norms the only sorts of norms that are relevant to considerations of mental disorder? (b) Should addressing norm deviations continue to be a major focus of mental healthcare? This paper introduces several norms that are relevant to mental disorder beyond the biological and social. I argue that mental disorders often deviate from individual, well-being, and regulatory norms. I also consider approaches which question mental healthcare’s focus on addressing norm deviations in the first place, including the neurodiversity paradigm, social model of disability, and Mad discourse. Utilizing these critical approaches, I contend that whether mental health intervention is justified depends, in part, on the type of norm deviation being intervened upon
On the limits of knowledge and the evolution of the physical laws in non-Euclidean universes
Full text linkThe anthropic principle suggests that the universe's fundamental constants are precisely fine-tuned to allow for life. However, by incorporating a dynamic physical perspective of nature, such as the multiscale thermodynamic principle known as Principium Luxuriæ, it is found that fundamental constants and forces of the universe may evolve over time in a non-Euclidean universe. If the universe has this geometry, it would have profound implications, which are discussed in this paper. For example, that the conditions conducive to life are not static and finely tuned but rather transient, undermining the need for a fine-tuned universe. Given that multiscale thermodynamics requires external forces, it's plausible that the universe's expansion could be linked to the existence of other phenomena such as other universes acting as external forces, each with their own evolving laws of physics. This suggests that life might be a transient and coincidental occurrence across multiple universes, if they exist. Additionally, the ever-evolving physical laws limit our ability to fully comprehend the universe at any given time. As we inevitably overlook certain aspects of reality, physical systems cannot be fully explained by the sum of their parts. Consequently, emergent phenomena like consciousness could not be studied from a self-referential perspective, as there will always be elements beyond our understanding
Organoid Ethical Typology: varieties of three-dimensional stem cell constructs and the many issues they raise in bioethics
Full text linkThe advancement of and prospects for stem cell research raise a number of specific ethical issues. While navigating the ethical landscape of stem cell research is often challenging for biology researchers and biotechnology innovators, it is also difficult for the public and other persons of concern (from ethicists to policy-makers) to grasp the technicalities of a burgeoning field that develops in many directions. Organoids are one of these new biotechnological constructs that are currently eliciting a rich debate in bioethics. In this guide, we argue that different types of organoids have different emerging properties with different ethical implications. Going from general properties to particular ones, we propose a typology of organoid technology and other associated biotechnology from a philosophical and ethical perspective. We point to relevant ethical issues and try to convey the sense of uncertainty peculiar to ongoing research and emerging technological objects
General Mathematical Proof of Occam’s Razor; Upgrading Theoretical Physicists’ Methodology
Full text linkThis paper's first aim is to prove a modernized Occam's razor beyond a reasonable doubt. To summarize the main argument in one sentence: If we consider all possible, intelligible, scientific models of ever‐higher complexity, democratically, the predictions most favored by these complex models will agree with the predictions of the simplest models. This fact can be proven mathematically, thereby validating Occam's razor.
Major parts of this line of reasoning have long preexisted within the depths of the algorithmic information theory literature, but they have always left room for doubts of various kinds. Therefore, we increase the generality, completeness, clarity, accessibility, and credibility of these arguments by countering over a dozen objections. We build our mathematical proof of Occam's razor on the shoulders of the exact ‘chain rule’ for Kolmogorov complexity.
Concerning physics, we then go on to diagnose the primary amendable root cause of the present stagnation of the research field of fundamental theoretical physics. We show that the effective antidote would consist in a practically feasible upgrade to the theoretical physicists' research methodology: When proposing new theoretical models, physicists should simply calculate and report the total amount of information that their models consist of. We explain why this methodology would be highly effective as well as how these calculations could be performed efficiently