Unity of science: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 03:47, 12 January 2019

The unity of science is a thesis in philosophy of science that says that all the sciences form a unified whole.

Overview

Even though, for example, physics and sociology are distinct disciplines, the thesis of the unity of science says that in principle they must be part of a unified intellectual endeavor: science. The unity of science thesis is often associated with a framework of levels of organization in nature, where physics is the most basic, chemistry the level above physics, biology above chemistry, sociology above biology, and so forth. Further, cells, organisms, and cultures are all biological, but they represent three different levels of biological organization.

It has also been suggested (for example, in Jean Piaget's 1918 work Recherche) that the unity of science can be considered in terms of a circle of the sciences, where logic is the foundation for mathematics, which is the foundation for mechanics and physics, and physics is the foundation for chemistry, which is the foundation for biology, which is the foundation for sociology, the moral sciences, psychology, and the theory of knowledge, and the theory of knowledge is based on logic.^[1]

The unity of science thesis is famously clarified and tentatively argued for by Ludwig von Bertalanffy in "General System Theory: A New Approach to Unity of Science" (1951) and by Paul Oppenheim and Hilary Putnam in "Unity of Science as a Working Hypothesis" (1958). It is famously argued against by Jerry Fodor in "Special Sciences (Or: The Disunity of Science as a Working Hypothesis)" (1974), by Paul Feyerabend in Against Method (1975) and later works, and by John Dupré in "The Disunity of Science" (1983) and The Disorder of Things: Metaphysical Foundations of the Disunity of Science (1993).

References

^ Piaget, Jean (2006) [1918]. "Recherche" (PDF). www.fondationjeanpiaget.ch. Retrieved 9 February 2017.

Bertalanffy, Ludwig von (December 1951). "General system theory: a new approach to unity of science: 1. Problems of general system theory". Human Biology. 23 (4): 302–312. JSTOR 41448003. PMID 14907026. {{cite journal}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help) Bertallanfy's article was part of a section that also included, in response, Carl G. Hempel's "General system theory and the unity of science" (pp. 313–322), Robert E. Bass's "Unity of nature" (pp. 323–327), and Hans Jonas's "Comment on general system theory" (pp. 328–335).
Boyd, Richard; Gasper, Philip; Trout, J. D., eds. (1991). The philosophy of science. A Bradford book. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. ISBN 0262023156. OCLC 22597466. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
Bunge, Mario (2003). Emergence and convergence: qualitative novelty and the unity of knowledge. Toronto studies in philosophy. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. doi:10.3138/9781442674356. ISBN 0802088600. OCLC 52411064. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
Cat, Jordi (2017). "The unity of science". In Zalta, Edward N. (ed.). Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2017 ed.). {{cite encyclopedia}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
Dupré, John (1993). The disorder of things: metaphysical foundations of the disunity of science. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. ISBN 0674212606. OCLC 25746325. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
Feyerabend, Paul (2011). "The disunity of science". The tyranny of science. Cambridge, UK; Malden, MA: Polity Press. pp. 32–63. ISBN 0745651895. OCLC 668946683. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
Fodor, Jerry A. (October 1974). "Special sciences (or: The disunity of science as a working hypothesis)". Synthese. 28 (2): 97–115. doi:10.1007/BF00485230. JSTOR 20114958. {{cite journal}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help) Reprinted in Boyd, Gasper & Trout 1991.
Galison, Peter; Stump, David J., eds. (1996). The disunity of science: boundaries, contexts, and power. Writing science. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. ISBN 0804724369. OCLC 32468580. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
Kincaid, Harold (1997). Individualism and the unity of science: essays on reduction, explanation, and the special sciences. Worldly philosophy. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield. ISBN 0847686620. OCLC 36817265. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
Odum, Howard T. (1995). "Energy systems and the unification of science". In Hall, Charles A. S. (ed.). Maximum power: the ideas and applications of H.T. Odum. Niwot, CO: University Press of Colorado. pp. 365–372. ISBN 0870813625. OCLC 31436211. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
Oppenheim, Paul; Putnam, Hilary (1958). "Unity of science as a working hypothesis". In Feigl, Herbert (ed.). Concepts, theories and the mind–body problem. Minnesota studies in the philosophy of science. Vol. 2. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. pp. 3–36. ISBN 9780816601585. OCLC 2669746. {{cite book}}: External link in |chapterurl= (help); Invalid |ref=harv (help); Unknown parameter |chapterurl= ignored (|chapter-url= suggested) (help) Reprinted in Boyd, Gasper & Trout 1991.
Pombo, Olga; Torres, Juan Manuel; Symons, John; Rahman, Shahid, eds. (2012). Special sciences and the unity of science. Dordrecht; New York: Springer-Verlag. doi:10.1007/978-94-007-2030-5. ISBN 9789400720299. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
Potochnik, Angela (May 2011). "A Neurathian conception of the unity of science". Erkenntnis. 74 (3): 305–319. doi:10.1007/s10670-010-9228-0. JSTOR 41476691. {{cite journal}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
Ruphy, Stéphanie (2016) [2013]. Scientific pluralism reconsidered: a new approach to the (dis)unity of science. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press. ISBN 9780822944584. OCLC 951158157. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
Symons, John; Pombo, Olga; Torres, Juan Manuel, eds. (2011). Otto Neurath and the unity of science. Logic, epistemology, and the unity of science. Vol. 18. Dodrecht; New York: Springer-Verlag. doi:10.1007/978-94-007-0143-4. ISBN 9789400701427. OCLC 723045353. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
Wilson, Malcolm (2000). Aristotle's theory of the unity of science. Phoenix, supplementary volume. Vol. 38. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. doi:10.3138/9781442670990. ISBN 0802047963. OCLC 43634904. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)

This philosophy-related article is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.

[1] Piaget, Jean (2006) [1918]. "Recherche" (PDF). www.fondationjeanpiaget.ch. Retrieved 9 February 2017.

[1]

@@ Line 3: / Line 3: @@
 ==Overview==
-Even though, for example, [[physics]] and [[sociology]] are distinct disciplines, the thesis of the unity of science says that in principle they must be part of a unified intellectual endeavor: science. The unity of science thesis is usually associated with the view of levels of organization in nature, where physics is the most basic, [[chemistry]] the level above physics, [[biology]] above chemistry, sociology above biology, and so forth. Further, [[Cell (biology)|cells]], [[organism]]s, and [[culture]]s are all biological, but they represent three different levels of biological organization.
+Even though, for example, [[physics]] and [[sociology]] are distinct disciplines, the thesis of the unity of science says that in principle they must be part of a unified intellectual endeavor: science. The unity of science thesis is often associated with a framework of levels of organization in nature, where physics is the most basic, [[chemistry]] the level above physics, [[biology]] above chemistry, sociology above biology, and so forth. Further, [[Cell (biology)|cells]], [[organism]]s, and [[culture]]s are all biological, but they represent three different levels of biological organization.
 It has also been suggested (for example, in [[Jean Piaget]]'s 1918 work ''Recherche'') that the unity of science can be considered in terms of a circle of the sciences, where logic is the foundation for mathematics, which is the foundation for mechanics and physics, and physics is the foundation for chemistry, which is the foundation for biology, which is the foundation for sociology, the moral sciences, psychology, and the theory of knowledge, and the theory of knowledge is based on logic.<ref>{{Cite web|website=www.fondationjeanpiaget.ch|title=Recherche|last=Piaget|first=Jean|authorlink=Jean Piaget|date=2006|origyear=1918|access-date=9 February 2017|url=http://www.fondationjeanpiaget.ch/fjp/site/textes/VE/JP_18_Recherche.pdf}}</ref>
+The unity of science thesis is famously clarified and tentatively argued for by [[Ludwig von Bertalanffy]] in "General System Theory: A New Approach to Unity of Science" (1951) and by [[Paul Oppenheim]] and [[Hilary Putnam]] in "Unity of Science as a Working Hypothesis" (1958). It is famously argued against by [[Jerry Fodor]] in "Special Sciences (Or: The Disunity of Science as a Working Hypothesis)" (1974), by [[Paul Feyerabend]] in ''Against Method'' (1975) and later works, and by [[John Dupré]] in "The Disunity of Science" (1983) and ''The Disorder of Things: Metaphysical Foundations of the Disunity of Science'' (1993).
-The thesis of a unity of science simply says that common scientific laws apply everywhere and on all levels of organization.  On some levels of organization, the scientists there will call these laws by another name, or emphasize the importance of one over another.  For example, thermodynamics or the laws of energy seem to be universal across a number of disciplines.  That is almost certainly because nearly all systems in nature operate using transactions in energy.  However, this does not rule out the possibility of some laws being particular to specific domains of inquiry—perhaps characterized by increasing complexity of those domains, as suggested by Henriques' (2003) [[tree of knowledge system]] that proposes four degrees of complexity (Matter, Life, Mind, and Culture). Of course, his tree might equally be a circle, with culture necessarily framing people's understanding of matter.
-Science is a human endeavor, a part of human culture.  It is unified in the sense that it is understood as a single endeavor, and there are no scientists studying alternative realities. To the extent that they do, however, one could argue that they are not unified. It is the perception of a single reality that results in a unity of science.
-Separately, science is also apparently on a path toward simplification or actually a "universalization" of discrete scientific theories about energy that physicists call unification. This has led to several theory among which [[string theory]], and is probably related to the notion that, at bottom, there is only the energy that was released in the big bang, and really nothing else.
-The unity of science thesis is most famously clarified and tentatively argued for by [[Ludwig von Bertalanffy]]'s [[General System Theory]], Sir Jagdish Chandra Bose,[[Paul Oppenheim]] and [[Hilary Putnam]]. It is most famously argued against by [[Jerry Fodor]], [[John Dupre]] and [[Paul Feyerabend]].
 ==See also==
+{{Div col|colwidth=20em}}
 * [[Consilience]]
+* [[International Encyclopedia of Unified Science]]
 * [[Logical positivism]]
 * [[Special sciences]]
 * [[Stanford School]]
+* [[Systems theory]]
 * [[The central science]]
-* [[Tree of Knowledge System]]
 * [[Unified Science]]
+{{Div col end}}
 ==References==
 {{Reflist}}
-*[[Richard Boyd]], [[Philip Gasper]] and [[J. D. Trout]] eds. (1991) ''Philosophy of Science'' Cambridge: MIT Press.
+==Further reading==
-*David Edwards and Steven Wilcox (1980)"Unity, Disunity and Pluralism in Science", https://arxiv.org/abs/1110.6545
+{{refbegin}}
-*Paul Oppenheim and Hilary Putnam (1958) "Unity of Science as a Working Hypothesis", https://web.archive.org/web/20110718080055/http://philosophy.wisc.edu/shapiro/Phil951/2010/openheim.putnam.unity.pdf, in ''Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science'' (vol. 2) pp.&nbsp;3–36. Reprinted in Boyd et al.
+* {{cite journal |last=Bertalanffy |first=Ludwig von |authorlink=Ludwig von Bertalanffy |date=December 1951 |title=General system theory: a new approach to unity of science: 1. Problems of general system theory |journal=[[Human Biology (journal)|Human Biology]] |volume=23 |issue=4 |pages=302–312 |jstor=41448003 |pmid=14907026 |ref=harv}} Bertallanfy's article was part of a section that also included, in response, [[Carl G. Hempel]]'s "General system theory and the unity of science" (pp.&nbsp;313–322), Robert E. Bass's "Unity of nature" (pp.&nbsp;323–327), and [[Hans Jonas]]'s "Comment on general system theory" (pp.&nbsp;328–335).
-*[[Jerry Fodor]], (1974) "Disunity of Science as Working Hypothesis" in ''Synthese'' (vol. 28) pp.&nbsp;77–115. http://www.springerlink.com/content/g2121805q31774r7/  Reprinted as "Special Sciences" in Boyd, et al.
+* {{cite book |editor1-last=Boyd |editor1-first=Richard |editor1-link=Richard Boyd |editor2-last=Gasper |editor2-first=Philip |editor3-last=Trout |editor3-first=J. D. |editor3-link=J. D. Trout |date=1991 |title=The philosophy of science |series=A Bradford book |location=Cambridge, MA |publisher=[[MIT Press]] |isbn=0262023156 |oclc=22597466 |ref=harv}}
-*Henriques, G.R. (2003). The Tree of Knowledge System and the Theoretical Unification of Psychology. Review of General Psychology, 7, 150-182.
+* {{cite book |last=Bunge |first=Mario |authorlink=Mario Bunge |date=2003 |title=Emergence and convergence: qualitative novelty and the unity of knowledge |series=Toronto studies in philosophy |location=Toronto |publisher=[[University of Toronto Press]] |isbn=0802088600 |oclc=52411064 |doi=10.3138/9781442674356 |ref=harv}}
-*[[H.T. Odum]], 1995. 'Energy Systems and the Unification of Science', in Hall, C.S. (ed.) Maximum Power: The Ideas and Applications of H.T. Odum. Colorado University Press, Colorado: 365-372.
+* {{cite SEP |url-id=scientific-unity |title=The unity of science |date=2017 |edition=Fall 2017 |last=Cat |first=Jordi |ref=harv}}
-*Piaget, J. (1950). Introduction à l'épistémologie génétique (3 Vol). Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.
+* {{cite book |last=Dupré |first=John |authorlink=John Dupré |date=1993 |title=The disorder of things: metaphysical foundations of the disunity of science |location=Cambridge, MA |publisher=[[Harvard University Press]] |isbn=0674212606 |oclc=25746325 |ref=harv}}
+* {{cite book |last=Feyerabend |first=Paul |authorlink=Paul Feyerabend |date=2011 |chapter=The disunity of science |title=The tyranny of science |location=Cambridge, UK; Malden, MA |publisher=[[Polity Press]] |pages=32–63 |isbn=0745651895 |oclc=668946683 |ref=harv}}
+* {{cite journal |last=Fodor |first=Jerry A. |authorlink=Jerry Fodor |date=October 1974 |title=Special sciences (or: The disunity of science as a working hypothesis) |journal=[[Synthese]] |volume=28 |issue=2 |pages=97–115 |doi=10.1007/BF00485230 |jstor=20114958 |ref=harv}} Reprinted in {{harvnb|Boyd|Gasper|Trout|1991}}.
+* {{cite book |editor1-last=Galison |editor1-first=Peter |editor1-link=Peter Galison |editor2-last=Stump |editor2-first=David J. |date=1996 |title=The disunity of science: boundaries, contexts, and power |series=Writing science |location=Stanford, CA |publisher=[[Stanford University Press]] |isbn=0804724369 |oclc=32468580 |ref=harv}}
+* {{cite book |last=Kincaid |first=Harold |date=1997 |title=Individualism and the unity of science: essays on reduction, explanation, and the special sciences |series=Worldly philosophy |location=Lanham, MD |publisher=[[Rowman & Littlefield]] |isbn=0847686620 |oclc=36817265 |ref=harv}}
+* {{cite book |last=Odum |first=Howard T. |authorlink=Howard T. Odum |date=1995 |chapter=Energy systems and the unification of science |editor-last=Hall |editor-first=Charles A. S. |editor-link=Charles A. S. Hall |title=Maximum power: the ideas and applications of H.T. Odum |location=Niwot, CO |publisher=[[University Press of Colorado]] |pages=365–372 |isbn=0870813625 |oclc=31436211 |ref=harv}}
+* {{cite book |last1=Oppenheim |first1=Paul |authorlink1=Paul Oppenheim |last2=Putnam |first2=Hilary |authorlink2=Hilary Putnam |date=1958 |chapter=Unity of science as a working hypothesis |editor-last=Feigl |editor-first=Herbert |title=Concepts, theories and the mind–body problem |series=Minnesota studies in the philosophy of science |volume=2 |location=Minneapolis |publisher=[[University of Minnesota Press]] |pages=3–36 |isbn=9780816601585 |oclc=2669746 |chapterurl=https://hdl.handle.net/11299/184622 |ref=harv}} Reprinted in {{harvnb|Boyd|Gasper|Trout|1991}}.
+* {{cite book |editor1-last=Pombo |editor1-first=Olga |editor2-last=Torres |editor2-first=Juan Manuel |editor3-last=Symons |editor3-first=John |editor4-last=Rahman |editor4-first=Shahid |date=2012 |title=[[Special sciences]] and the unity of science |location=Dordrecht; New York |publisher=[[Springer-Verlag]] |isbn=9789400720299 |doi=10.1007/978-94-007-2030-5 |ref=harv}}
+* {{cite journal |last=Potochnik |first=Angela |date=May 2011 |title=A Neurathian conception of the unity of science |journal=[[Erkenntnis]] |volume=74 |issue=3 |pages=305–319 |doi=10.1007/s10670-010-9228-0 |jstor=41476691 |ref=harv}}
+* {{cite book |last=Ruphy |first=Stéphanie |date=2016 |origyear=2013 |title=Scientific pluralism reconsidered: a new approach to the (dis)unity of science |location=Pittsburgh |publisher=[[University of Pittsburgh Press]] |isbn=9780822944584 |oclc=951158157 |ref=harv}}
+* {{cite book |editor1-last=Symons |editor1-first=John |editor2-last=Pombo |editor2-first=Olga |editor3-last=Torres |editor3-first=Juan Manuel |date=2011 |title=[[Otto Neurath]] and the unity of science |series=Logic, epistemology, and the unity of science |volume=18 |location=Dodrecht; New York |publisher=[[Springer-Verlag]] |isbn=9789400701427 |oclc=723045353 |doi=10.1007/978-94-007-0143-4 |ref=harv}}
+* {{cite book |last=Wilson |first=Malcolm |date=2000 |title=[[Aristotle]]'s theory of the unity of science |series=Phoenix, supplementary volume |volume=38 |location=Toronto |publisher=[[University of Toronto Press]] |isbn=0802047963 |oclc=43634904 |doi=10.3138/9781442670990 |ref=harv}}
+{{refend}}
 {{Philosophy of science}}
@@ Line 41: / Line 51: @@
 [[Category:Philosophy of science]]
 [[Category:Metaphysics of science]]
+{{Philo-stub}}

v t e Science and technology studies
Economics	Economics of science Economics of scientific knowledge
History	History and philosophy of science History of science and technology History of technology
Philosophy	Anthropocene Antipositivism Empiricism Fuzzy logic Neo-Luddism Philosophy of science Philosophy of social science Philosophy of technology Positivism Postpositivism Religion and science Scientism Social constructivism Social epistemology Transhumanism
Sociology	Actor–network theory Social construction of technology shaping of technology Sociology of knowledge scientific Sociology of scientific ignorance Sociology of the history of science Sociotechnology Strong programme
Science studies	Antiscience Bibliometrics Boundary-work Consilience Criticism of science Demarcation problem Double hermeneutic Logology Mapping controversies Metascience Paradigm shift black swan events Pseudoscience Psychology of science Science citizen communication education normal Neo-colonial post-normal rhetoric wars Scientific community consensus controversy dissent enterprise literacy method misconduct priority skepticism Scientocracy Scientometrics Team science Traditional knowledge ecological Unity of science Women in science STEM
Technology studies	Co-production Cyborg anthropology Design studies Dematerialization Digital anthropology Digital media use and mental health Early adopter Engineering studies Financial technology Hype cycle Innovation diffusion disruptive linear model system user Leapfrogging Normalization process theory Media studies Reverse salient Skunkworks project Sociotechnical system Technical change Technocracy Technoscience feminist Technological change convergence determinism revolution transitions Technology and society criticism of dynamics theories of transfer Women in engineering
Policy	Academic freedom Digital divide Evidence-based policy Factor 10 Funding of science Horizon scanning Politicization of science Regulation of science Research ethics Right to science Science policy history of science of Technology assessment Technology policy Transition management
Portals Science History of science Technology Category Associations Journals Scholars