Multiple Realizations, Diverse Implementations and Antireductionism
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 20142610 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Sung‐su Kim (0000-0002-9213-6540, Texas Tech University, corresponding author), Sungsu Kim (0000-0001-7668-8815) |
| Year | 2009 |
| Volume | 75 |
| Issue | 3 |
| Pages | 232-244 |
| Publication date | 2009-09-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Theoria (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0040-5825 • E-ISSN: 1755-2567 |
| Publisher | Wiley (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1111/j.1755-2567.2009.01041.x |
| OpenAlex | W2150562560 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 10 |
It has been debated what implications multiple realizability has for reductionism. I claim that more explicit attention needs to be paid to the distinction between multiple realizations of kinds and diverse implementations of laws. In this paper, I distinguish two different theses on the relations between multiple realization and diverse implementation: one thesis states that multiple realizations imply diverse implementations and the other states the converse. I claim that although antireductionism might turn out to be false if the first thesis is accepted, this “realization‐based” antireductionism is not the only option for antireductionism. For the antireductionists who accept the second thesis, multiple realizations only provide evidence for diverse implementations. I defend this “implementation‐based” antireductionism again Shapiro's dilemma. I argue that one horn of the dilemma does not pose any problem and that the other horn simply begs the question
Algorithm · Assertion · Converse · Dilemma · Epistemology · Implementation · Mathematical economics · Programming language · Realizability · Realization (probability) · Computer Science · Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics · Mathematics · Philosophy · Philosophy and History of Science · Philosophy and Theoretical Science · Theoretical Computer Science
| Citation velocity | historical |
|---|---|
| Highly cited | No |