How and when are topological explanations complete mechanistic explanations? The case of multilayer network models.
The relationship between topological explanation and mechanistic explanation is unclear. Most philosophers agree that at least some topological explanations are mechanistic explanations. The crucial question is how to make sense of this claim. Zednik (Philos Psychol 32(1):23–51, 2019, ) argues that...
| Publicado en: | Synthese Vol. 202; no. 1; pp. 1 - 22 |
|---|---|
| Autores principales: | , , |
| Formato: | Artículo |
| Publicado: |
Springer Nature
Jul2023
|
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=164670655&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: hlh uiTerm: 164670655 longDbName: Humanities International Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: jinfo: jid: 00397857 4LI jtl: Synthese issn: 00397857 maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: Jul2023 vid: 202 iid: 1 pid: 237 pub: Springer Nature artinfo: ui: 164670655 10.1007/s11229-023-04241-z ppf: 1 ppct: 21 formats: fmt: – @attributes: type: T – @attributes: type: P size: 498KB tig: atl: How and when are topological explanations complete mechanistic explanations? The case of multilayer network models. aug: au: Krickel, Beate de Bruin, Leon Douw, Linda affil: Institute of History and Philosophy of Science, Technology, and Literature, Technical University Berlin, Straße des 17. Juni 135, 10623, Berlin, Germany Department of Anatomy & Neurosciences, Amsterdam UMC Location Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Neuroscience, Amsterdam, The Netherlands sug: keyword: Mechanistic completeness Mechanistic explanation Multilayer models Network models Neuroscientific explanation Topological explanation ab: The relationship between topological explanation and mechanistic explanation is unclear. Most philosophers agree that at least some topological explanations are mechanistic explanations. The crucial question is how to make sense of this claim. Zednik (Philos Psychol 32(1):23–51, 2019, ) argues that topological explanations are mechanistic if they (i) describe mechanism sketches that (ii) pick out organizational properties of mechanisms. While we agree with Zednik’s conclusion, we critically discuss Zednik’s account and show that it fails as a general account of how and when topological explanations are mechanistic. First, if topological explanations were just mechanism sketches, this implies that they could be enriched by replacing topological terms with mechanistic detail. This, however, conflicts how topological explanations are used in scientific practice. Second, Zednik’s account fails to show how topological properties can be organizational properties of mechanisms that have a place in mechanistic explanation. The core issue is that Zednik’s account ignores that topological properties often are global properties while mechanistic explanantia refer to local properties. We demonstrate how these problems can be solved by a recent account of mechanistic completeness (Craver and Kaplan in Br J Philos Sci 71(1):287–319, 2020, ; Kohár and Krickel in Calzavarini and Viola (eds) Neural mechanisms—new challenges in the philosophy of neuroscience, Springer, New York, 2021, ) and use a multilayer network model of Alzheimer’s Disease to illustrate this. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Article src: R language: English refInfo: copyright: @attributes: flag: Y custom: Synthese is a copyright of Springer, 2023. All Rights Reserved. item: Synthese holder: Springer Nature dt: @attributes: year: 2023 holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|