| [1] | Achim, S. (1992). Emergence—A systematic view on its historical facets. In A. B. Kim and J. H. Flores (Eds.), Emergence or Reduction? (pp. 25-48). Berlin: De Gruyter.
|
| [2] | Adler, I., & Adler, R. (1962). Thinking machines. New York: Signet.
|
| [3] | Alexander, S. I. (1920). Space, time, and deity. London: Macmillan.
|
| [4] | Allen, R. (1966). Greek philosophy: Thales to Aristotle. New York: The Free Press.
|
| [5] | Allison, H. (2004). Kant’s transcendental idealism: An interpretation and defense. New Haven: Yale University Press.
|
| [6] | Aristotle (2001). Metaphysics, the basic works of Aristotle. New York: Modern Library.
|
| [7] | Bergson, H. (1944). Creative evolution. New York: Random House.
|
| [8] | Bogen, J., & Woodward, J. (1988). Saving the phenomena. Philosophical Review, 97, 303-352. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2185445
|
| [9] | Breitenbach, A. (2011). Kant on causal knowledge: Causality, mechanism and reflective judgment. In K. Allen, & T. Stoneham (Eds.), Causation and Modern Philosophy (pp. 201-219). London: Routledge.
|
| [10] | Brighton, H. (2008). Introducing artificial intelligence. Portland, ME: Totem Books.
|
| [11] | Brook, A. (1994). Kant and the mind. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511624629
|
| [12] | Brook, A. (2008). Kant’s view of the mind and consciousness of the self. Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy.
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-mind/
|
| [13] | Buchdahl, G. (1992). Kant and the dynamics of reason. Oxford: Blackwell.
|
| [14] | Bunge, M. (1977). Emergence and the mind. Neuroscience, 2, 501-509.
|
| [15] | Chrucky, A. (2008). An interview with David Armstrong about W. Sellars. Mikolka-Inquiries.
http://mikolka-inquiries.blogspot.mx/2008/11/interview-with-david-armstrong-about-w.html
|
| [16] | Churchland, P. S. (1986). Neurophilosophy. Cambridge: MIT Press.
|
| [17] | Clayton, P. (2008). Conceptual foundations of emergence theory. In Paul, D., & Philip, C. (Eds.), The re-emergence of emergence: The emergentist hypothesis from science and religion (pp. 1-31). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199544318.003.0001
|
| [18] | Corradini, A., & O’Connor (2010). Timothy, emergence in science and philosophy. New York: Routledge.
|
| [19] | D’Abro, A. (1939). The decline of mechanism in modern physics. D. Van Nostrand Company, Inc.
|
| [20] | 29The reason the present author does not embrace the perspectivist reading tout court is, roughly, due to some uncertainty whether the various perspectives in Kant’s system can be combined into a completely consistent system without some modifications.
|
| [21] | 30As the present author understands this, the place for Hegel’s famed opposition to dualisms, including, ironically, his opposition to the various Kantian dualisms (Sedgwick, 2012, 6-8, 107, 159, etc.), is already prepared in Kant’s system of perspectives, but this must be a matter for another occasion.
|
| [22] | Dartnall, T. (1996). Cognitive science and the crisis it is facing. Metascience, 5, 95-105.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02988881
|
| [23] | Davidson, D. (1999). The emergence of thought. Erkentnis, 51, 511521.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1005564223855
|
| [24] | Davies, P. (2008). Preface to the re-emergence of emergence: The emergentist hypothesis from science and religion, Paul Davies and Philip Clayton (Eds.), (pp. xi-xiv). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
|
| [25] | 31As the present author understands this point, the need for a multi-faceted perspectivist account derives from the unique nature of a living organism.
|
| [26] | 32It would not be possible to dedicate this paper to anyone other than the one and only Wilfrid Sellars.
|
| [27] | Dennett, D. (1981). Brainstorms. Cambridge: MIT.
|
| [28] | Dreyfus, H. (1993). What computers still can’t do. Cambridge: MIT.
|
| [29] | Eiser, J. R. (1991). Attitudes, chaos, and the connectionist mind. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
|
| [30] | Engels, F. (1994). Ludwig feuerbach and the end of classical german philosophy. Marx-Engels Internet Archive.
http://marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1886/ludwig-feuerbach/index.htm
|
| [31] | Fancher, R. (1990). Pioneers of psychology. New York: Norton.
|
| [32] | Fodor, J. (1979). The language of thought. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
|
| [33] | Fodor, J. (1987). Psychosemantics: The problem of meaning in the philosophy of mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
|
| [34] | Fodor, J. (1998). Concepts: Where cognitive science went wrong. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/0198236360.001.0001
|
| [35] | Fodor, J. (2001). The mind doesn’t work that way. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
|
| [36] | Ginsborg, H. (2013). Kant’s aesthetics and teleology. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-aesthetics/
|
| [37] | Goldberg, B. (1983). Mechanism and meaning. In C. Ginet, & S. Shoemaker (Eds.), Knowledge and Mind (pp. 191-210). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
|
| [38] | Goudge, T. A. (1967). Emergent-evolutionism. In The encyclopedia of philosophy, vol. 2 (pp. 474-477). New York: Collier-Macmillan.
|
| [39] | van Guick, R. (1992). Non-reductive physicalism and the nature of theoretic constraint. In J. Kim, A. Beckermann, & H. Flores (Eds.), Emergence or reduction (pp. 157-179). Berlin: Walter De Gruyter.
|
| [40] | Hansson, S. (2008). Science and pseudo science. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/pseudo-science/
|
| [41] | Hasker, W. (1999). The emergent self. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
|
| [42] | Hegel, G. F. W. (1979). Phenomenology of spirit. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
|
| [43] | Heidegger, M. (1962). Kant and the problem of metaphysics. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.
|
| [44] | Hempel, C. (1965). Aspects of scientific explanation. New York: Free Press.
|
| [45] | Hodges, A. (2013). Alan Turing. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/turing/#MacInt
|
| [46] | Kant, I. (1950). Prolegomena to any future metaphysics. New York: Bobbs-Merrill.
|
| [47] | Kant, I. (1968). Critique is the critique of judgement. New York: Harper.
|
| [48] | Kant, I. (1969). Critique of pure reason. New York: St Martin’s Press.
|
| [49] | Kant, I. (1970). Metaphysical foundations of natural science. Indianapolis, IN: Bobbs-Merrill.
|
| [50] | Kant, I. (1983). What is Enlightenment? In Perpetual peace and other essays (pp. 41-48). Indianapolis, IN: Hackett.
|
| [51] | Kant, I. (1996). Anthropology from a practical point of view. In V. Dowdell (Ed.), Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.
|
| [52] | Kant, I. (1998). Opus postumum. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
|
| [53] | Kant, I. (2004). Critique of practical reason. New York: Dover.
|
| [54] | Kim, J. Downward causation. In J. Kim, A. Beckermann, & H. Flores (Eds.), Emergence or reduction (pp. 119-138). Berlin: De Gruyter.
|
| [55] | Kim, J. (1993). Supervenience and mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511625220
|
| [56] | Kitcher, Patricia (1984). Discovering the forms of intuition. The Philosophical Review, XCVI, 205-248.
|
| [57] | Kitcher, Patricia (1990a). Kant’s dedicated cognitive system. In J. C. Smith (Ed.), Historical Foundations of Cognitive Science (pp. 189209). New York: Springer.
|
| [58] | Kitcher, Patricia (1990b). Kant’s transcendental psychology. New York: Oxford University Press.
|
| [59] | Kitcher, Philip (1982). How Kant almost wrote “Two Dogmas of Empiricism”. In J. N. Mohanty, & R. Shahane (Eds.), Essays on Kant’s critique of pure reason (pp. 217-250). Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.
|
| [60] | Levin, J. (2013). Functionalism. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/functionalism/
|
| [61] | Lowe, E. J. (2000). Causal closure principles and emergentism. Philosophy, 75, 571-585.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S003181910000067X
|
| [62] | Margolis, J. (1986). Emergence. The Philosophical Forum, XVII, 271295.
|
| [63] | Margolis, J. (1987). Science without unity. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
|
| [64] | McDonough, R. (1995). Kant’s historicist alternative to cognitive science. The Southern Journal of Philosophy, 33, 203-219.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.2041-6962.1995.tb00740.x
|
| [65] | McDonough, R. (1997). Heidegger on Kant on the alternative to the scientism of the Enlightenment. The Journal for the British Society of Phenomenology, 28, 236-254.
|
| [66] | McDonough, R. (1998). Kant’s anti-scientism and the origins of phenomenology. The Journal for the British Society of Phenomenology, 29, 236-254.
|
| [67] | McDonough, R. (1999a). Introduction to Wittgenstein and cognitive science. In R. McDonough (Ed.), Idealistic Studies, 29, 125-138.
|
| [68] | McDonough, R. (1999b). Bringing cognitive science back to life. Idealistic Studies, 29, 173-213.
|
| [69] | McDonough, R. (2002). Emergence and creativity: Five degrees of freedom. In T. Dartnall (Ed.), Creativity, cognition, and knowledge (pp. 283-320). Westport, CT: Praeger.
|
| [70] | McDonough, R. (2006). Martin Heidegger’s being and time. New York: Peter Lang.
|
| [71] | McDonough, R. (2011). A synoptic view of Kant’s emergentism. Iyyun, 60, 245-274.
|
| [72] | McGinn, C. (1989). Can we solve the mind-body problem? Mind, 98, 349-366.
http://art-mind.org/review/IMG/pdf/McGinn_1989_Mind-body-problem_M.pdf
|
| [73] | McGinn, C. (2004). Consciousness, atomism, and the ancient Greeks. In Consciousness and its objects (pp. 115-135). Oxford: Oxford University Press. http://consc.net/neh/papers/mcginn1.doc
|
| [74] | McLaughlin, B. (1992). The rise and fall of British emergentism. In J. Kim, A. Beckermann, & H. Flores (Eds.), Emergence or reduction (pp. 49-93). Berlin: De Gruyter.
|
| [75] | Meerbote, R. (1990). Kant’s functionalism. In J. C. Smith (Ed.), Historical foundations of cognitive science (pp. 161-188). New York: Springer.
|
| [76] | Mill, J. S. (1999). Logic of the moral sciences. Indianapolis: Open Court.
|
| [77] | Moore, G. E. (1994). Principia ethica. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
|
| [78] | Morgan, L. (1923). Emergent evolution. London: Williams and Norgate.
|
| [79] | Mourelatos, A. (1986). Quality, structure, and emergence in later presocratic philosophy. Proceedings in Boston Colloquium in Ancient Philosophy, 2, 127-194.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/2213441786X00129
|
| [80] | Nagel, E. (1979). The structure of science. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett.
|
| [81] | O’Connor, T. (2012). Emergent properties. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/properties-emergent/
|
| [82] | Palmquist, S. (1993). Kant’s system of perspectives. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.
|
| [83] | Palmquist, S. (2007). Emergence, evolution, and the geometry of logic: The myth of historical development. Foundations of Science, 12, 937. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10699-006-0004-1
|
| [84] | Pears, D. (1987). The false prison. Vol. I, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/0198247702.001.0001
|
| [85] | Pepper, S. (1926). Emergence. Journal of Philosophy, 23, 241-245.
http://www.ditext.com/pepper/emerge.html
http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2014779
|
| [86] | Pinker, S. (2013). Language, cognition, and human nature: Selected articles. New York: Oxford University Press.
|
| [87] | Pluher, W. (1987). Introduction and notes to Kant, Immanuel. Critique of judgment. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett.
|
| [88] | Popper, K. (1950). The open society and its enemies. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
|
| [89] | Popper, K. (1961). The poverty of historicism. New York: Harper.
|
| [90] | Popper, K. (1972). Objective knowledge. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
|
| [91] | Popper, K. (2002). Unended quest. New York: Routledge.
|
| [92] | Putnam, H. (1964). Minds and machines. In A. R. Anderson (Ed.), Minds and machines (pp. 72-97). Engelwood Cliffs, NJ: PrenticeHall.
|
| [93] | Quine, W. V. (1951). Two dogmas of empiricism. Philosophical Review, 60, 20-43.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2181906
|
| [94] | Reid, R. (2007). Biological emergences: Evolution by natural experiment. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
|
| [95] | Rockwell, W. T. (2007). Neither brain nor ghost. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
|
| [96] | Rosenberg, J. (2009). Wilfrid Sellars. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/sellars/
|
| [97] | Rueger, A. (2000). Physical emergence: Synchronic and diachronic. Synthese, 124, 297-322. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1005249907425
|
| [98] | Russell, B. (1992). The analysis of matter. Cornwall: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
|
| [99] | Savin, H. B. (1973). A review of Katz’s semantic analysis. Cognition, 2, 212-238.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(72).90012-1
|
| [100] | Schrader, G. (1967a). Kant’s theory of concepts. In R. P. Wolff (Ed.), Kant: A collection of critical essays (pp. 134-155). New York: Doubleday.
|
| [101] | Schrader, G. (1967b). The Thing-in-itself in Kantian philosophy. In R. P. Wolff (Ed.), Kant: A collection of critical essays (172-188). New York: Doubleday-Anchor.
|
| [102] | Searle, J. (1983). Intentionality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139173452
|
| [103] | Searle, J. (1980). Minds, brains, and programs. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 3, 417-457.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00005756
|
| [104] | Sedgwick, S. (2012). Hegel’s critique of Kant: From dichotomy to identity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199698363.001.0001
|
| [105] | Seibt, J. (1990). Properties as processes. Atascadero, CA: Ridgeview.
|
| [106] | Sellars, R. W. (1970). Principles of emergent realism. St. Louis, MO: Warren H. Green.
|
| [107] | Sellars, W. (1949). Aristotelian philosophies of mind. Philosophy for the future: Quest for modern materialism (pp. 544-570). New York: Macmillan. http://www.ditext.com/sellars/apm.html
|
| [108] | Sellars, W. (1991a). Philosophy and the scientific image of man. Science, perception, and reality (pp. 1-40). Atascadero, CA: Ridgeview.
|
| [109] | Sellars, W. (1991). “Phenomenalism”. In Science, perception and reality (pp. 60-105). Atascadero, CA: Ridgeview.
|
| [110] | Sellars, W. (1968). Science and metaphysics. New York: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
|
| [111] | Sellars, W., & Meehl, P. E. (1956). The concept of emergence. Vol. l. In H. Feigl, & M. Scriven (Eds.), Minnesota studies in the philosophy of science (pp. 239-252). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
|
| [112] | Shoemaker, S. (2002). Kim on Emergence. Philosophical Studies, 58, 53-63.
http://philpapers.org/s/sydney%20shoemaker
|
| [113] | Strawson, P. (1963). Individuals. New York: Doubleday and Co.
|
| [114] | Strawson, P. (1968). The bounds of sense. London: Metheun.
|
| [115] | Wallace, W. (1894). Prolegomena to the study of Hegel’s philosophy. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
|
| [116] | Watson, J. (1892). Schelling’s transcendental idealism. Chicago, IL: S. C. Griggs & Company.
|
| [117] | Weiskopf, D. (2011). Models and mechanisms in psychological explanation. Synthese, 183, 313-338.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11229-011-9958-9
|
| [118] | Whitehead, A. N. (1967). Science and the modern world. New York: The Free Press.
|
| [119] | Whitehead, A. N. (1978). Process and reality. In D. Griffin, & D. Sherburne (Eds.), New York: Free Press.
|
| [120] | Wittgenstein, L. (1980). Culture and value. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
|
| [121] | Zumbach, C. (1984). The transcendent science: Kant's conception of biological methodology. The Hague, Boston, Lancaster: MartinusNijhoff. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-6104-3
|
