Abstract
In Chapter 1 I briefly introduce the philosophical project that I pursue in this book. My central goal is to provide an understanding of an important element of contemporary biological research practice, namely of reductive explanation.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
I assume that there are four types of reduction that one should keep apart: ontological reduction and three kinds of epistemic reduction, namely theory, methodological, and explanatory reduction (this difference is spelled out in Chap. 3).
- 2.
References
Ahn, A. C., Tewari, M., Poon, C.-S., & Phillips, R. S. (2006a). The limits of reductionism in medicine: Could systems biology offer an alternative? PLoS Medicine, 3(6), 709–713.
Bechtel, W., & Richardson, R. C. (2010). Discovering complexity. Decomposition and localization as strategies in scientific research. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Craver, C. F. (2005). Beyond reduction: Mechanisms, multifield integration, and the unity of neuroscience. Studies in the History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences, 36, 373–395.
Craver, C. F. (2007a). Explaining the brain. Mechanisms and the mosaic unity of neuroscience. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Darden, L. (2005). Relations among fields: Mendelian, cytological and molecular mechanisms. Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences, 36, 357–371.
Gallagher, R., & Appenzeller, T. (1999). Beyond reductionism. Science, 284, 79.
Kaiser, M. I. (2011). Limits of reductionism in the life sciences. History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences, 33, 453–476.
Kaiser, M. I. (2012). Why it is time to move beyond nagelian reduction. In D. Dieks, W. J. Gonzalez, S. Hartmann, M. Stöltzner, & M. Weber (Eds.), Probabilities, laws, and structures (The philosophy of science in a European perspective, Vol. 3, pp. 255–272). Heidelberg: Springer.
Mazzocchi, F. (2008). Complexity in biology. Exceeding the limits of reductionism and determinism using complexity theory. EMBO Reports, 9, 10–14.
Mitchell, S. D. (2003). Biological complexity and integrative pluralism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Mitchell, S. D. (2009). Unsimple truths. Science, complexity, and policy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Mitchell, S. D., & Dietrich, M. (2006). Integration without unification: An argument for pluralism in the biological sciences. American Naturalist, 168, 73–79.
Nagel, E. (1961). The structure of science. Problems in the logic of scientific explanation. London: Routledge.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Kaiser, M.I. (2015). Introduction. In: Reductive Explanation in the Biological Sciences. History, Philosophy and Theory of the Life Sciences. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-25310-7_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-25310-7_1
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-25308-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-25310-7
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawPhilosophy and Religion (R0)