Organisms, activity, and being: on the substance of process ontology

Author:

Austin Christopher J.ORCID

Abstract

AbstractAccording to contemporary ‘process ontology’, organisms are best conceptualised as spatio-temporally extended entities whose mereological composition is fundamentally contingent and whose essence consists in changeability. In contrast to the Aristotelian precepts of classical ‘substance ontology’, from the four-dimensional perspective of this framework, the identity of an organism is grounded not in certain collections of privileged properties, or features which it could not fail to possess, but in the succession of diachronic relations by which it persists, or ‘perdures’ as one entity over time. In this paper, I offer a novel defence of substance ontology by arguing that the coherency and plausibility of the radical reconceptualisation of organisms proffered by process ontology ultimately depends upon its making use of the ‘substantial’ principles it purports to replace.

Funder

University of Durham

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Subject

History and Philosophy of Science,Philosophy

Reference74 articles.

1. Allen, G. (2005). Mechanism, Vitalism and Organicism in late nineteenth and twentieth-century biology: The importance of historical context. Studies in the History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences, 36(2), 261–283.

2. Aristotle. (1984). The Complete Works of Aristotle (Vol. I & II). (J. Barnes, Trans.) Princeton: Princeton University Press.

3. Arnellos, A. (2018). From organizations of process to organisms and other biological individuals. In D. Nicholson & J. Dupré (Eds.), Everything flows: Towards a Processual philosophy of biology (pp. 199–221). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

4. Austin, C.J. (2016). The ontology of organisms: Mechanistic modules or patterned processes? Biology & Philosophy, 31(5), 639–662.

5. Austin, C.J. & Marmodoro, A. (2018). Structural Powers and the homeodynamic unity of organisms. In W.M.R. Simpson, R.C. Koons, & N.J. Teh (Eds.), Neo-Aristotelian perspectives on contemporary science (pp. 169–184). London: Routledge.

Cited by 10 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3