Do organisms have an ontological status?

Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
The category of ‘organism’ has an ambiguous status: is it scientific or is it philosophical? Or, if one looks at it from within the relatively recent field or sub-field of philosophy of biology, is it a central, or at least legitimate category therein, or should it be dispensed with? In any case, it has long served as a kind of scientific “bolstering” for a philosophical train of argument which seeks to refute the “mechanistic” or “reductionist” trend, which has been perceived as dominant since the 17th century, whether in the case of Stahlian animism, Leibnizian monadology, the neo-vitalism of Hans Driesch, or, lastly, of the “phenomenology of organic life” in the 20th century, with authors such as Kurt Goldstein, Maurice Merleau-Ponty, and Georges Canguilhem. In this paper I try to reconstruct some of the main interpretive ‘stages’ or ‘layers’ of the concept of organism in order to critically evaluate it. How might ‘organism’ be a useful concept if one rules out the excesses of ‘organismic’ biology and metaphysics? Varieties of instrumentalism and what I call the ‘projective’ concept of organism are appealing, but perhaps ultimately unsatisfying.
PhilPapers/Archive ID
WOLDOH
Revision history
Archival date: 2015-11-21
View upload history
References found in this work BETA
Thinking About Mechanisms.Machamer, Peter K.; Darden, Lindley & Craver, Carl F.
Real Patterns.Dennett, Daniel C.
How Brains Make Chaos in Order to Make Sense of the World.Skarda, Christine A. & Freeman, Walter J.
The Death of Nature.Merchant, Carolyn

View all 47 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

View all 9 citations / Add more citations

Added to PP index
2010-06-15

Total views
496 ( #5,278 of 40,103 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
51 ( #10,226 of 40,103 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks to external links.