Advertisement

Physics and the Phenomenal World

  • Jean Petitot
  • Barry Smith
Part of the Nijhoff International Philosophy Series book series (NIPS, volume 53)

Abstract

One of the main problems of the philosophy of science is that of arriving at a plausible conception of the relations between (1) the phenomenal or commonsensical world that is apprehended in perception and described by natural language and (2) the world of standard physical theories, or of such fundamental theories of the microstructure of matter and radiation as: Newtonian mechanics, the Maxwell theory of electromagnetism, special and general relativity, and quantum mechanics. The rise of mathematical physics has long been seen by many as dictating a dismissal of the phenomenal world — the world macroscopically organized in objectual forms, shapes, secondary qualities and states of affairs — from the realm of properly ontological concerns and as dictating a concomitant ‘psychologization’ of phenomenal structures. There is, then, a reductionist assumption common amongst philosophers to the effect that it is only microphysical reality that has a structure of its own (that the world as it is in itself is a matter of ‘minute, widely-separated colourless particles’2). In fact, however, the discovery of atoms or quarks in no way served to eliminate molecules, macromolecules, or indeed macroscopic objects together with their macroscopic properties from the realm of physics — all are physical systems of a perfectly well-defined sort.3

Keywords

Phenomenal World Galilean Group Apparent Contour Covariance Principle Naive Physic 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Abraham, R. and Marsden, J.E. 1978: Foundations of Mechanics, Reading, Mass, Benjamin/Cummings.Google Scholar
  2. Arnold, V. I. 1989: Mathematical Methods of Classical Mechanics, New York, Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Arnold, V.I., Gusein-Zade, S.M. and Varchenko, A.N. 1985: Singularities of Differentiable Maps, Boston, Birkhäuser.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Boi, L. et. al. (eds.) 1993: 1830–1930. A Century of Geometry, Lecture Notes in Physics, Berlin, Springer.Google Scholar
  5. Bozzi, P. 1958: “Analisi fenomenologica del moto pendolare armonico”, Rivista di Psicologia 52, 281–302.Google Scholar
  6. Bozzi, P. 1959: “Le condizioni del movimento ‘naturale’ lungo i piani inclinati”, Rivista di Psicologia 53, 337–352.Google Scholar
  7. Bozzi, P. 1989: “Sulla preistoria della fisica ingenua”, Sistemi intelligenti 1, 61–74.Google Scholar
  8. Crane, T. 1991: “All God has to do”, Analysis 51, 235–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Domb, C. and Green, M.S. (eds.) 1972–1985: Phase Transitions and Critical Phenomena, New York, Academic Press.Google Scholar
  10. Fine, K. 1994: “The Theory of Part and Whole”, in Smith and Smith 1994.Google Scholar
  11. Fodor, J. 1980: “Methodological Solipsism Considered as a Research Strategy in Cognitive Psychology”, Behavioral and Brain Sciences 3, 63–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fodor, J. and Pylyshyn, Z. 1981: “How Direct is Visual Perception? Some Reflections on Gibson’s ‘Ecological Approach’“, Cognition 9, 139–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Forguson, L. 1989: Common Sense, London and New York, Routledge.Google Scholar
  14. Gibson, J.J. 1979: The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception, Boston, Houghton-Mifflin.Google Scholar
  15. Hayes, P.J. 1985: “The Second Naive Physics Manifesto”, in Hobbs and Moore 1985, 1–36.Google Scholar
  16. Hobbs, J.R. and Moore, R.C. (eds.) 1985: Formal Theories of the Commonsense World, Ablex.Google Scholar
  17. Husserl, E. 1975/84: Logische Untersuchungen (Husserliana, vols. XVIII and XIX), Dordrecht, Nijhoff.Google Scholar
  18. Jackson, F. 1977: Perception, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Kleer J.D. and Brown, J.S. 1984: “A Qualitative Physics Based on Confluences”, Artificial Intelligence 24, 7–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Koenderink, J.J. and Doom, A.J. van 1986: “Dynamic Shape”, Biological Cybernetics 53, 383–396.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Marr, D. 1982: Vision, San Francisco, Freeman.Google Scholar
  22. Meinong, A. von 1906: Über die Erfahrungsgrundlagen unseres Wissens, Berlin, J. Springer (repr. in Meinong, Gesamtausgabe, vol. V, Graz, Akademische Druck- und Verlagsanstalt, 1978).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Morton, A. 1990: “Can’t Kant: Smith on Folk Physics”, in Tiles, McKee and Dean 1990, 251–261.Google Scholar
  24. Nassau, K. 1983: The Physics and Chemistry of Color, New York, John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
  25. Petitot, J. 1985: Morphogenèse du Sens, vol. 1, Paris, Presses Universitaires de France.Google Scholar
  26. Petitot, J. 1989: “Morphodynamics and the Categorial Perception of Phonological Units”, Theoretical Linguistics 15, 25–71.Google Scholar
  27. Petitot, J. 1989a: “Hypothèse localiste, Modèles morphodynamiques et Théories cognitives”, Semiotica11, 65–119.Google Scholar
  28. Petitot, J. 1990: “Le Physique, le Morphologique, le Symbolique. Remarques sur la Vision”, Revue de Synthèse 4, 139–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Petitot, J. 1991: “Why Connectionism is Such a Good Thing. A Criticism of Fodor and Pylyshyn’s Criticism of Smolensky”, Philosophica 47, 49–79.Google Scholar
  30. Petitot, J. 1992: “Actuality of Transcendental Aesthetics for Modern Physics”, in Boi 1993, 273–304.Google Scholar
  31. Petitot, J. 1992a: Physique du Sens, Paris, Editions du CNRS.Google Scholar
  32. Petitot, J. and Smith, B. 1990: “New Foundations for Qualitative Physics”, in Tiles, McKee and Dean 1990, 231–249.Google Scholar
  33. Poggio, T. 1984: “Vision by Man and Machine”, Scientific American 250, 68–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Putnam, H. 1987: The Many Faces of Realism, LaSalle, Open Court.Google Scholar
  35. Quigg, C. 1983: Gauge Theories of the Strong, Weak and Electromagnetic Interactions, Menlo Park, Benjamin/Cummings.Google Scholar
  36. Smith, B. (ed.) 1982: Parts and Moments. Studies in Logic and Formal Ontology, Munich, Philosophia.Google Scholar
  37. Smith, B. 1995: “The Structures of the Commonsense World”, Logos 2.Google Scholar
  38. Smith, B. (forthcoming): “Common Sense”.Google Scholar
  39. Smith, B. and Casati, R. 1993: “Naive Physics: An Essay in Ontology”, Philosophical Psychology, forthcoming.Google Scholar
  40. Smith, B. and Smith, D.W. (eds.) 1994: The Cambridge Companion to Husserl, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, forthcoming.Google Scholar
  41. Thorn, R. 1972: Stabilité structurelle et Morphogenèse, New York, Benjamin; Paris, Ediscience.Google Scholar
  42. Thom, R. 1978: “Formalisme et Scientificité”, Les Etudes philosophiques2, 171–78.Google Scholar
  43. Thom, R. 1980: Modèles mathématiques de la Morphogenèse, Paris, Christian Bourgeois.Google Scholar
  44. Thom, R. 1988: Esquisse d’une Sémiophysique. Physique aristotélicienne et Théorie des Catastrophes, Paris, Intereditions.Google Scholar
  45. Thom, R. 1990: Apologie du Logos, Paris, Hachette.Google Scholar
  46. Tiles, J.E., McKee, G.T. and Dean, C.G. (eds.) 1990: Evolving Knowledge in Natural Science and Artificial Intelligence, London, Pitman Publishing.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jean Petitot
  • Barry Smith

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations