Restless clock : a history of the centuries-long argument over what makes living things tick
Publication details: University of Chicago Press, 2016 Chicago: Description: xiii;548p. pb; 23 cmISBN:- 9780226528267
- 147 RIS
Item type | Current library | Call number | Copy number | Status | Date due | Barcode |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
![]() |
IIT Gandhinagar | 147 RIS (Browse shelf(Opens below)) | 1 | Available | 028013 |
Browsing IIT Gandhinagar shelves Close shelf browser (Hides shelf browser)
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
||
146.4 MAR Analytic philosophy : an anthology | 146.42 AYE Language, truth and logic | 146.5 RUS Philosophy of logical atomism | 147 RIS Restless clock : a history of the centuries-long argument over what makes living things tick | 149 GER Nihilism | 149 WOL What is Posthumanism? | 149.7 BRA Reason in philosophy: animating ideas |
Today, a scientific explanation is not meant to ascribe agency to natural phenomena: we would not say a rock falls because it seeks the center of the earth. Even for living things, in the natural sciences and often in the social sciences, the same is true. A modern botanist would not say that plants pursue sunlight. This has not always been the case, nor, perhaps, was it inevitable. Since the seventeenth century, many thinkers have made agency, in various forms, central to science. The Restless Clock examines the history of this principle, banning agency, in the life sciences. It also tells the story of dissenters embracing the opposite idea: that agency is essential to nature. The story begins with the automata of early modern Europe, as models for the new science of living things, and traces questions of science and agency through Descartes, Leibniz, Lamarck, and Darwin, among many others. Mechanist science, Jessica Riskin shows, had an associated theology: the argument from design, which found evidence for a designer in the mechanisms of nature. Rejecting such appeals to a supernatural God, the dissenters sought to naturalize agency rather than outsourcing it to a “divine engineer.” Their model cast living things not as passive but as active, self-making machines. The conflict between passive- and active-mechanist approaches maintains a subterranean life in current science, shaping debates in fields such as evolutionary biology, cognitive science, and artificial intelligence. This history promises not only to inform such debates, but also our sense of the possibilities for what it means to engage in science 2014; and even what it means to be alive. -- Provided by publisher.
There are no comments on this title.