20.12.2012 Views

n3-al-mukhatabat-journal

n3-al-mukhatabat-journal

n3-al-mukhatabat-journal

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

1. The ontologic<strong>al</strong> constru<strong>al</strong>: is there some robust sense in which<br />

everything in the world can be said to be nothing but the fundament<strong>al</strong><br />

constituents of re<strong>al</strong>ity (such as super-strings) or at the very least,<br />

determined by those constituents?<br />

2. The epistemologic<strong>al</strong> constru<strong>al</strong>: is there some robust sense in which<br />

our scientific theories/schemas about the macroscopic features of the<br />

world can be reduced to or identified with our scientific theories about<br />

the most fundament<strong>al</strong> features of the world. 110<br />

Yet, according to Silberstein, these two constru<strong>al</strong>s are inextricably related. He<br />

explains, moreover, that reductionism is the view that the best understanding of<br />

a complex system should be sought at the level of the structure, behavior and<br />

laws of its component parts plus their relations. The ontologic<strong>al</strong> assumption<br />

implicit is that the most fundament<strong>al</strong> physic<strong>al</strong> level, whatever that turns out to be,<br />

is ultimately the “re<strong>al</strong>” ontology of the world, and anything else that is to keep the<br />

status of re<strong>al</strong> must somehow be able to be ‘mapped onto’ or ‘built out of’ those<br />

elements of the fundament<strong>al</strong> ontology (Silberstein: 81).<br />

Thus, the three basic presuppositions of the classic<strong>al</strong> mechanistic model of<br />

nature, namely, the indivisible corpuscular fin<strong>al</strong> constituents, determinism, and<br />

reduction, by advancement of science turned out to be mere philosophic<strong>al</strong> or<br />

theoretic<strong>al</strong> constructs, instead of being true in the re<strong>al</strong> world. As we will see in<br />

the next section, this leads to the conclusion that the mechanistic model in its<br />

classic<strong>al</strong> or re<strong>al</strong>istic sense has in effect failed.<br />

These difficulties that confront the mechanistic model have forced its proponents<br />

to defend it in sever<strong>al</strong> ways. Despite its increasing inconsistency with natur<strong>al</strong><br />

phenomena, such a defense is now bearing heavily on the metaphysic<strong>al</strong><br />

assumption that future advancement of science will bring with it scientific<br />

justification of such a view.<br />

110 Silberstein, Michael. 2002, "Reduction, Emergence and Explanation", in Peter Machamer and Michael<br />

Silberstein (eds.), The Blackwell Guide to the Philosophy of Science, Blackwell, P. 80.<br />

AL-MUKHATABAT Numéro 03 Année 01/2012 لىولأا ةن سلا 30 ددعلا تابطانا<br />

123<br />

ISSN: 1737-6432

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!