• Complain

Richard E. Lee (editor) - Questioning Nineteenth-Century Assumptions about Knowledge, II: Reductionism

Here you can read online Richard E. Lee (editor) - Questioning Nineteenth-Century Assumptions about Knowledge, II: Reductionism full text of the book (entire story) in english for free. Download pdf and epub, get meaning, cover and reviews about this ebook. year: 2010, publisher: State University of New York Press, genre: Religion. Description of the work, (preface) as well as reviews are available. Best literature library LitArk.com created for fans of good reading and offers a wide selection of genres:

Romance novel Science fiction Adventure Detective Science History Home and family Prose Art Politics Computer Non-fiction Religion Business Children Humor

Choose a favorite category and find really read worthwhile books. Enjoy immersion in the world of imagination, feel the emotions of the characters or learn something new for yourself, make an fascinating discovery.

No cover
  • Book:
    Questioning Nineteenth-Century Assumptions about Knowledge, II: Reductionism
  • Author:
  • Publisher:
    State University of New York Press
  • Genre:
  • Year:
    2010
  • Rating:
    4 / 5
  • Favourites:
    Add to favourites
  • Your mark:
    • 80
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    • 4
    • 5

Questioning Nineteenth-Century Assumptions about Knowledge, II: Reductionism: summary, description and annotation

We offer to read an annotation, description, summary or preface (depends on what the author of the book "Questioning Nineteenth-Century Assumptions about Knowledge, II: Reductionism" wrote himself). If you haven't found the necessary information about the book — write in the comments, we will try to find it.

A provocative survey of interdisciplinary challenges to the concept of reductionism.
During the last few decades, the fundamental premises of the modern view of knowledge have been increasingly called into question. Questioning Nineteenth-Century Assumptions about Knowledge, II: Reductionism provides an in-depth look at the debates surrounding the status of reductionism in the sciences, social sciences, and the humanities in detailed and wide-ranging discussions among experts from across the disciplines. Whether or not there is or should be a basic epistemological stance that is different in the sciences and humanities, and whether or not such a stance as exemplified by the approach to reductionism is changing, has enormous consequences for all aspects of knowledge production. Featured are an overview and subsequent discussion of this pervasive concept in the social sciences that parses reductionism into the categories of strong social constructionism and antiessentialism, social ontology and the apathetic actor, dualisms, and individualism. Also of interest in chapters and follow-up discussions are the relations between essentialism and emergentism in complex systems theory.
Modern knowledge, according to the contributors to this multivolume exercise (based on three symposia), is based on three questionable premises and principles: determinism, reductionism, and dualism. Each volume interrogates these three principles and seeks to find alternative and more satisfying bases for knowledge. The volumes include formal papers as well as commentaries and edited transcripts of the discussions at each symposium. The range is truly extraordinary, with papers covering everything from economics to opera, cognitive neuroscience, literary studies, mathematical modeling, and systems theory [the volumes] open a host of questions for scholars to ponder and suggest many enlightening lines of inquiry Highly recommended. CHOICE

Richard E. Lee (editor): author's other books


Who wrote Questioning Nineteenth-Century Assumptions about Knowledge, II: Reductionism? Find out the surname, the name of the author of the book and a list of all author's works by series.

Questioning Nineteenth-Century Assumptions about Knowledge, II: Reductionism — read online for free the complete book (whole text) full work

Below is the text of the book, divided by pages. System saving the place of the last page read, allows you to conveniently read the book "Questioning Nineteenth-Century Assumptions about Knowledge, II: Reductionism" online for free, without having to search again every time where you left off. Put a bookmark, and you can go to the page where you finished reading at any time.

Light

Font size:

Reset

Interval:

Bookmark:

Make
FERNAND BRAUDEL CENTER STUDIES IN HISTORICAL SOCIAL SCIENCE Series Editor - photo 1
FERNAND BRAUDEL CENTER
STUDIES IN HISTORICAL SOCIAL SCIENCE
Series Editor: Richard E. Lee
The Fernand Braudel Center Studies in Historical Social Science will publish works that address theoretical and empirical questions produced by scholars in or through the Fernand Braudel Center or who share its approach and concerns. It specifically seeks to promote works that contribute to the development of the world-systems perspective engaging a holistic and relational vision of the worldthe modern world-systemimplicit in historical social science, which at once takes into consideration structures (long-term regularities) and change (history). With the intellectual boundaries within the sciences/ social sciences/humanities structure collapsing in the work scholars actually do, this series will offer a venue for a wide range of research that confronts the dilemmas of producing relevant accounts of historical processes in the context of the rapidly changing structures of both the social and academic world. The series will include monographs, colloquia, and collections of essays organized around specific themes.
VOLUMES IN THIS SERIES:
Questioning Nineteenth-Century Assumptions about Knowledge I: Determinism
Richard E. Lee, editor
Questioning Nineteenth-Century Assumptions about Knowledge II: Reductionism
Richard E. Lee, editor
Questioning Nineteenth-Century Assumptions about Knowledge III: Dualism
Richard E. Lee, editor
Questioning Nineteenth-Century Assumptions about Knowledge
II
R E D U C T I O N I S M
Edited by Richard E. Lee
Foreword by Immanuel Wallerstein
Questioning Nineteenth-Century Assumptions about Knowledge II Reductionism - image 2
FERNAND BRAUDEL CENTER
STUDIES IN HISTORICAL SOCIAL SCIENCE
Questioning Nineteenth-Century Assumptions about Knowledge II Reductionism - image 3
Published by State University of New York Press, Albany
2010 State University of New York
All rights reserved
Printed in the United States of America
No part of this book may be used or reproduced in any manner whatsoever without written permission. No part of this book may be stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means including electronic, electrostatic, magnetic tape, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise without the prior permission in writing of the publisher.
For information, contact State University of New York Press, Albany, NY
www.sunypress.edu
Production by Diane Ganeles
Marketing by Michael Campochiaro
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Questioning nineteenth-century assumptions about knowledge / edited by Richard E. Lee ; foreword
by Immanuel Wallerstein.
v. (The Fernand Braudel Center studies in historical social science series)
Includes bibliographical references and index.
Contents: v. 1. Determinism
ISBN 978-1-4384-3441-4 (hardcover : alk. paper)
ISBN 978-1-4384-3440-7 (pbk. : alk. paper)
1. Knowledge, Theory of. I. Lee, Richard E., 1945
BD161.Q47 2010
121dc22 2010004836
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
PARTICIPANTS
AVIV BERGMANAlbert Einstein College of Medicine, New York, NY
JEAN-PIERRE DUPUYEcole Polytechnique [GRISE], Paris; and Stanford University, Stanford, CA
JOO CARAADirector of Science, Gulbenkian Foundation, Lisbon, Portugal
PAUL CILLIERSPhilosophy, Stellenbosch University, Stellenbosch, South Africa
PAUL DUMOUCHELSchool of Core Ethics and Frontier Sciences, Ritsumeikan University, Kyoto, Japan
ERIC GOLESPresident, CONYCIT, Santiago, Chile
N. KATHERINE HAYLESEnglish, University of California, Los Angeles, CA
JEAN PETITOTCentre de Recherche en Epistmologie Applique, Ecole Polytechnique, Paris, France
ISTVAN REVHistory, Central European University, Budapest, Hungary
ANDREW SAYERSociology, Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK
ULLICA SEGERSTRALESociology, Illinois Institute of Technology, Chicago, IL
EVAN THOMPSONPhilosophy, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada
IMMANUEL WALLERSTEINSociology, Yale University, New Haven, CT
RICHARD E. LEE (Scientific Secretary)Fernand Braudel Center, Binghamton University, Binghamton, NY
ILLUSTRATIONS
Comparison between drawings of visual hallucinations and mathematical models
The receptive profile of a simple orientation cell of V1. 1: schematized structure. 2 and 3: mathematical model. 4: empirical recording
The functional architecture of the area V1 of a cat
Left: The association field of Field, Hayes and Hess experiments.
Right: Curved Kanizsa illusory contours
Some examples of eigenmodes in V
The retinotopic conformal map, mapping the retina on V1
Lines in V1 correspond to spiral on the retina
Klver's planforms are isomorphic to eigenmodes of the bifurcated solutions of the neural network in the synaptic weights of which the functional architecture of V1 has been encoded
Other examples of eigenmodes
Other examples of eigenmodes
The result of the tournament between 12 strategies, each represented by 100 agents
Nowak and May's example of Tit for Tat strategy, displayed spatially
The temporal evolution of the subpopulations (c, c) and (d, d) of figure 3.12
For b = 2.1 and a 50%50% InitConfig, defection d dominates immediately and totally
The temporal evolution of the subpopulations (c, c) and (d, d) of figure 3.14
For b = 1.85 in the critical interval and a 50%50% InitConfig, the behavior (d, d) begins to dominate; next (c, c) begins to reconquer ground by expanding from nuclei that resisted the initial extermination, but multi-scale nested clusters of c and d appear and expand in a fractal structure
The temporal evolution of the subpopulations (c, c) and (d, d) of figure 3.16
Evolution of the system for b = 1.85 (inside the critical interval) and an InitConfig reduced to a single (d, d) in a purely (c, c) population
FOREWORD
T his volume is one of three in a series devoted to the theme: Questioning Nineteenth-Century Assumptions about Knowledge. The project was organized by Jean-Pierre Dupuy (a philosopher of science affiliated with the Centre de Recherche en Epis tmologie Applique, Paris), Aviv Bergman (an evolutionary biologist who directs the Aviv Bergman Laboratory at the Albert Einstein School of Medicine, New York), and Immanuel Wallerstein (a sociologist, formerly Director of the Fernand Braudel Center at Binghamton University and currently a Senior Research Scholar at Yale University). Its Scientific Secretary was Richard E. Lee, the current Director of the Fernand Braudel Center.
The underlying premise of this series of conferences was that, in the last thirty years, scholars in all fields have been raising into question some of the fundamental premises of the modern view of knowledge, as it had been developing for at least five centuries and, in particular, as it was codified in the nine teenth century. It was at that time that a view of knowledge that was determinist, reductionist, and dualist came to predominate the intellectual scene, and found parallel expression in the natural sciences/mathematics, the social sciences, and the humanities/philosophy.
Next page
Light

Font size:

Reset

Interval:

Bookmark:

Make

Similar books «Questioning Nineteenth-Century Assumptions about Knowledge, II: Reductionism»

Look at similar books to Questioning Nineteenth-Century Assumptions about Knowledge, II: Reductionism. We have selected literature similar in name and meaning in the hope of providing readers with more options to find new, interesting, not yet read works.


Reviews about «Questioning Nineteenth-Century Assumptions about Knowledge, II: Reductionism»

Discussion, reviews of the book Questioning Nineteenth-Century Assumptions about Knowledge, II: Reductionism and just readers' own opinions. Leave your comments, write what you think about the work, its meaning or the main characters. Specify what exactly you liked and what you didn't like, and why you think so.