Reductionism is the belief that human behavior can be explained by breaking it down into smaller component parts. It can be applied to objects, phenomena, explanations, theories, and meanings. Reductionism strongly reflects a certain perspective on causality. In a reductionist framework, the phenomena that can be explained completely in terms of relations between other more fundamental phenomena, are called epiphenomena. It does not preclude the existence of what might be called emergent phenomena, but it does imply the ability to understand those phenomena completely in terms of the processes from which they are composed.
Falsifiability is the belief that for any hypothesis to have credence, it must be inherently disprovable before it can become accepted as a scientific hypothesis or theory. Falsifiability as a black and white definition, that if a theory is falsifiable, it is scientific, and if not, then it is unscientific. Karl Popper famously suggested the criterion of “falsifiability”—a theory is scientific if it makes clear predictions that can be unambiguously falsified. It criterion gestures toward something true and important about science, but it is a blunt instrument in a situation that calls for subtlety and precision. It is better to emphasize two more central features of good scientific theories: they are definite, and they are empirical.
Contingency in Philosophy is a state where something could be either true or false. It is not normally an issue in propositional or first-order logic, but in modal logic, there is an important distinction there. Contingency of formulae is universally important, as it distinguishes normal formulae from tautologies and contradictions. It is deemed necessary or impossible depends almost entirely on time and perspective. It is also an alternate plan in case a previous expected event does not occur.
Simulation Theory of Empathy is rather a theory of how people understand others, that they do so by way of a kind of empathetic response. This theory uses more biological evidence than other theories of mind, such as the theory-theory. It is an account of our everyday ability to make sense of the behavior of others. It has been hailed as the primary means for gaining knowledge of other minds and as the method uniquely suited for the human sciences, only to be almost entirely neglected philosophically for the rest of the century.
Neuroethics focuses on ethical issues raised by our increased and constantly improving understanding of the brain and our ability to monitor and influence it. This ethical issues emerge from our concomitant deepening understanding of the biological bases of agency and ethical decision-making. Some neuroethics problems are not fundamentally different from those encountered in bioethics. Others are unique to neuroethics because the brain, as the organ of the mind, has implications for broader philosophical problems, such as the nature of free will, moral responsibility, self-deception, and personal identity.
Eugenics is a movement of philosophy and social argues, which is possible to improve the human race and society by encouraging reproduction by people or populations with “desirable” traits and discouraging reproduction by people with “undesirable” qualities. It’s aimed at improving the genetic composition of the human race. It was supported and encouraged by a wide swath of people, including politicians, scientists, social reformers, prominent business leaders and other influential individuals who shared a goal of reducing the “burden” on society.
This article focus on Biotic Ethics, which is a branch of ethics that values not only species and biospheres, but life itself. It’s value more generally organic gene/protein life itself, the structures and processes shared by all the biota. Biotic Ethics defines life as a process whose outcome is the self-reproduction of complex molecular patterns. It is consequentialist, with principles that are consistent with environmental ethics, including Deep Ecology, biocentric ethics and aspects of anthropocentrism, that aim to protect existing species and ecosystems.
Biocentrism in Ethics elements can be found in several religious traditions, it was not until the late decades of the 20th century that philosophical ethics in the Western tradition addressed the topic in a systematic manner. It is an understanding of how the earth works, particularly as it relates to biodiversity. It stands in contrast to anthropocentrism, which centers on the value of humans. Biocentrism encompasses all environmental ethics that “extend the status of moral object from human beings to all living things in nature.” Biocentrism Ethics calls for a rethinking of the relationship between humans and nature.
Pragmatic Theory of Truth is the ideas about truth are often confused with the quite distinct notions of “logic and inquiry”, “judging what is true”, and “truth predicates”. It may be described according to several dimensions of description that affect the character of the predicate “true”. Pragmatic Theory of Truth can be found in the writings of Pragmatist Charles S. Pierce, according to whom there is no distinction of meaning so fine as to consist in anything but a possible difference of practice. The point of the above quote is to explain that one cannot conceive of the truth of a belief without also being able to conceive of how, if true, that belief matters in the world.
Pragmatic Maxim is originally intended to convey, at least in Peirce’s earliest statements, and to briefly discuss some of the consequences of this maxim for philosophical method. It is actually a family of principles, not all equivalent at least on the surface.It also known as the maxim of pragmatism or the maxim of pragmaticism, is a maxim of logic formulated by Charles Sanders Peirce. It appears, then, that the rule for attaining the third grade of clearness of apprehension is as follows: Consider what effects, that might conceivably have practical bearings, we conceive the object of our conception to have.