Switch to: References

Citations of:

The Case for Emergent Evolution

Philosophy 4 (13):23-38 (1929)

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Diachronic Emergence as Transubstantiation.Peter Wyss - 2023 - Philosophia 51 (3):1745-1762.
    Diachronic emergence has recently been characterised as transformation. This aims to capture the thought that the entities that emerge are radically new or different. Transformation is hence closely linked with a central (but rarely raised) challenge for all emergentists: how to account for the identity and individuation of entities involved in emergence. With this challenge in view, I develop and probe four interpretations of transformation: addition, replacement, fusion, and transubstantiation. Of those, transubstantiation provides the most plausible response to the challenge (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Supervenient Emergentism and Mereological Emergentism.Dwayne Moore - 2015 - Axiomathes 25 (4):457-477.
    In recent years, emergentism has resurfaced as a possible method by which to secure autonomous mental causation from within a physicalistic framework. Critics argue, however, that emergentism fails, since emergentism entails that effects have sufficient physical causes, so they cannot also have distinct mental causes. In this paper I argue that this objection may be effective against supervenient emergentism, but it is not established that it is effective against mereological emergentism. In fact, after demonstrating that two founding emergentists, Samuel Alexander (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Evolution, emergence and mind.David Blitz - unknown
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • From Formation to Ecosystem: Tansley's Response to Clements' Climax. [REVIEW]Arnold G. Van der Valk - 2013 - Journal of the History of Biology:1-29.
    Arthur G. Tansley never accepted Frederic E. Clements’ view that succession is a developmental process whose final stage, the climax formation, is determined primarily by regional climate and that all other types of vegetation are some kind of successional stage or arrested successional stage. Tansley was convinced that in a given region a variety of environmental factors could produce different kinds of climax formations. At the heart of their dispute was Clements’ organicist view of succession, i.e., the formation was a (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • From Formation to Ecosystem: Tansley’s Response to Clements’ Climax.Arnold G. van der Valk - 2014 - Journal of the History of Biology 47 (2):293-321.
    Arthur G. Tansley never accepted Frederic E. Clements’ view that succession is a developmental process whose final stage, the climax formation, is determined primarily by regional climate and that all other types of vegetation are some kind of successional stage or arrested successional stage. Tansley was convinced that in a given region a variety of environmental factors could produce different kinds of climax formations. At the heart of their dispute was Clements’ organicist view of succession, i.e., the formation was a (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations