Abstract
A new demarcation is proposed between Natural Philosophy and non-Natural Philosophy—philosophy tout court—based on whether or not they follow a non-standard logic of real processes. This non-propositional logic, Logic in Reality (LIR), is based on the original work of the Franco-Romanian thinker Stéphane Lupasco (Bucharest, 1900–Paris, 1988). Many Natural Philosophies remain bounded by dependence on binary linguistic concepts of logic. I claim that LIR can naturalize—bring into science—part of such philosophies. Against the potential objection that my approach blurs the distinction between science and philosophy, I reply that there is no problem in differentiating experimental physical science and philosophy; any complete distinction between philosophy, including the philosophy of science(s) and the other sciences is invidious. It was historically unnecessary and is unnecessary today. The convergence of science and philosophy, proposed by Wu Kun based on implications of the philosophy of information, supports this position. LIR provides a rigorous basis for giving equivalent ontological value to diversity and identity, what is contradictory, inconsistent, absent, missing or past, unconscious, incomplete, and fuzzy as to their positive counterparts. The naturalized Natural Philosophy resulting from the application of these principles is a candidate for the ‘new synthesis’ called for by the editors.
Highlights
In 1949, it was still possible for Alfred Ayer [1] to write: “ . . . the function of the philosopher is not to devise speculative theories which require to be validated in experience, but to elicit the consequences of our linguistic usages
Another current field of research is that of the philosophy of information, pioneered by Wu Kun in China [7] and Luciano Floridi in Unlike Ayer, I expect of philosophy that, like science in a different way, it tells us something about nature, man’s unique position in nature and his interaction with it
For a philosophy of mind, the central problem is to show how physical tokens, the neuro-physiological processes occurring in the brain, can give rise to mental tokens that retain the properties of intentionality, ‘aboutness’, individuality and some level of causal powers or functionality
Summary
In 1949, it was still possible for Alfred Ayer [1] to write: “ . . . the function of the philosopher is not to devise speculative theories which require to be validated in experience, but to elicit the consequences of our linguistic usages. Examples are the concept of the embodied mind of Lakoff and Johnson [2], an extension of basic phenomenological positions introduced by Merleau-Ponty, and the philosophy of neuroscience of Bennett and Hacker [3] This period has seen the development of the philosophy of process, extensions of the work of Whitehead [4], Rescher [5], and Seibt [6]. Unlike Ayer, I expect of philosophy that, like science in a different way, it tells us something about nature, man’s unique position in nature and his interaction with it It is a body of knowledge, a theory of reality that can fail in two major ways.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
