Hylomorphism and the new mechanist philosophy in biology, neuroscience, and psychology

Book section

Is Neo-Aristotelian hylomorphism compatible mechanistic science? In this essay I forge a rapprochement between Neo-Aristotelian hylomorphism and the “new mechanist philosophy” in biology, neuroscience, and psychology by drawing attention to their shared commitments concerning multilevel organization, mechanisms, and teleology. Significantly, the new mechanists endorse organization realism (a touchstone of hylomorphism). Similarly, Neo-Aristotelian hylomorphism is committed to the reality of mechanisms or causal powers that produce, underlie, or maintain the behavior of (i) phenomena that are constituted through the (ii) spatial, temporal, and active organization of their (iii) component entities and (iv) component activities (the four hallmarks of the new mechanist philosophy). In the course of the essay I address potential disagreements between these two positions pertaining to emergence, downward causation, and teleology. I conclude that Neo-Aristotelian hylomorphism should not been seen as fundamentally opposed to mechanisms; rather, hylomorphism provides a rigorous ontological framework that complements the insights of the new mechanist philosophy of biology, neuroscience and psychology.

Authors: De Haan, D

• Publication status: Published
• Peer review status: Peer reviewed
• Publisher: Routledge
• Host title: Neo-Aristotelian Perspectives on Contemporary Science
• Issue: 12
• Pages: 293-326
• Series: Routledge Studies in the Philosophy of Science
• Publication date: 2017-10-16
• ISBN-10: 0415792568
• ISBN-13: 9780415792561
• Keywords: SBTMR