Greetings all,

This Monday, March 10, 1.00-2.30 in the philosophy
common room we have Charles Wolf from the University
of Sydney:

Do organisms have an ontological status 
or: a cautionary tale about crying ‘reductionist!’


The category of ‘organism’ has an ambiguous status: is
it scientific or is it philosophical? Or, if one looks
at it from within the relatively recent field or
sub-field of philosophy of biology, is it a central,
or at least legitimate category therein, or should it
be dispensed with? In any case, it has long served as
a kind of scientific “bolstering” for a philosophical
train of argument which seeks to refute the
“mechanistic” or “reductionist” trend, which has been
perceived as dominant since the 17th century, whether
in the case of Stahlian animism, Leibnizian
monadology, the neo-vitalism of Hans Driesch, or,
lastly, of the “phenomenology of organic life” in the
20th century, with authors such as Kurt Goldstein
(along with Erwin Straus, and Viktor von Weizsäcker),
Maurice Merleau-Ponty, and Georges Canguilhem. In this
paper I try to reconstruct some of the main
interpretive ‘stages’ or ‘layers’ of the concept of
organism in order to critically evaluate it. How might
‘organism’ be a useful concept if one rules out the
excesses of ‘organismic’ biology and metaphysics? I
give a tentative answer (instrumentalism) and then
challenge it.


See you all there....




Dr. Kristie Miller
Australian Research Council Post-doctoral Fellow
School of Philosophical and Historical Inquiry and
The Centre for Time
The University of Sydney
Sydney, Australia

Room 411, A18
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Ph: (work) 02 93569663
Ph: (mobile)  0432 275 286
http://homepage.mac.com/centre.for.time/KristieMiller/Kristie/Home%20Page.html
_______________________________________________
SydPhil mailing list
[email protected]
List Info: http://lists.arts.usyd.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/sydphil

NEW LIST ARCHIVE: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/

Reply via email to