Advertisement

Unity without Uniformity: Cross-Discourse Contribution

  • Michael P. Wolf
  • Jeremy Randel Koons
Chapter
  • 173 Downloads

Abstract

In the preceding chapters, we have staked out an anti-reductionist account of normative discourse, albeit a less-than-conventional one. While we eschewed ontological commitments (not just to normative entities, but even to substantive normative properties), we defended an account of action-guiding content on which normative sentences could be true or false. Ontological eliminativism about the normative does not entail doctrinal eliminativism, as we said in the early going. This is an anti-reductionist account in the sense that what we say “at the normative level” will not be explained (and potentially displaced) by a more “fundamental” vocabulary such as psychology or physics, nor will there be entities and properties “at the normative level” identified with entities and substantive properties at a more “fundamental” one (trivially in our case, since we are not positing normative entities or properties at all).

Keywords

Special Science Ontological Commitment Mathematical Discourse Food Desert Classical Genetic 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Churchland, Paul. 1979. Scientific Realism and the Plasticity of Mind. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Gallagher, T.F., and Fred C. Koch. 1929. The Testicular Hormone. The Journal of Biological Chemistry 84: 495–500.Google Scholar
  3. Hair, N.L., J.L. Hanson, B.L. Wolfe, and S.D. Pollak. 2015. Association of Child Poverty, Brain Development, and Academic Achievement. JAMA Pediatrics, July 20. doi:10.1001/jamapediatrics.2015.1475.Google Scholar
  4. Jensen, Sarah K.G., Erin W. Dickie, Deborah H. Schwartz, C. John Evans, Iroise Dumontheil, Tomas Paus, and Edward D. Barker. 2015. Effect of Early Adversity and Childhood Internalizing Symptoms on Brain Structure in Young Men. JAMA Pediatrics 169(10): 938–946. doi: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2015.1468.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Kitcher, Philip. 1984. 1953 and All That: A Tale of Two Sciences. The Philosophical Review 93(3): 355–373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Nieschlag, Eberhard, and Susan Nieschlag. 2012. The Medical and Cultural History of Testosterone and the Testes. In Testosterone: Action, Deficiency and Substitution, ed. E. Nieschlag, H. Behre, and S. Nieschlag, 1–14. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Simon, Herbert. 1955. A behavioral model of rational choice. Quarterly Journal of Economics 59: 99–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Simon, Herbert. 1956. Rational choice and the structure of the environment. Psychological Review 63: 129–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Walker, Susan P., Theodore D. Wachs, Julie Meeks Gardner, Betsy Lozoff, Gail A. Wasserman, Ernesto Pollitt, and Julie A. Carter. 2007. Child Development: Risk Factors for Adverse Outcomes in Developing Countries. The Lancet 369(9556): 145–157. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(07)60076-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael P. Wolf
    • 1
  • Jeremy Randel Koons
    • 2
  1. 1.Washington, PAUSA
  2. 2.DohaQatar

Personalised recommendations