1. Science features – summary 1 Science is the organized, systematic enterprize that gathers knowledge about the world and our theorizations and condenses it into testable laws and principles. Science is the organized, systematic enterprize that gathers knowledge about the world and our theorizations and condenses it into testable laws and principles. The features of science that distinguish it from pseudoscience are: repeatability, economy, mensuration, heuristics, consilience. The features of science that distinguish it from pseudoscience are: repeatability, economy, mensuration, heuristics, consilience.

2. Science features – summary 2 Repeatability: The same phenomenon is sought again, preferably by independent investigation, and the interpretation given to it is confirmed or discarded by means of novel analysis and experimentation. Repeatability: The same phenomenon is sought again, preferably by independent investigation, and the interpretation given to it is confirmed or discarded by means of novel analysis and experimentation. Economy: Scientists attempt to abstract the information into the form that is both simplest and aesthetically most pleasing – the combination called elegance – while yielding the largest amount of information with the least amount of effort. Economy: Scientists attempt to abstract the information into the form that is both simplest and aesthetically most pleasing – the combination called elegance – while yielding the largest amount of information with the least amount of effort.

3. Science features – summary 3 Mensuration: If something come be properly measured, using universally accepted scales, generalizations about it are rendered unambiguous. Mensuration: If something come be properly measured, using universally accepted scales, generalizations about it are rendered unambiguous. Heuristics: The best science stimulates further discovery, often in unpredictable new directions; and the new knowledge provides an additional test of the original principles that led to its discovery. Heuristics: The best science stimulates further discovery, often in unpredictable new directions; and the new knowledge provides an additional test of the original principles that led to its discovery. Consilience: The explanations most likely to survive of different phenomena are those that can be connected and proved consistent with one another. Consilience: The explanations most likely to survive of different phenomena are those that can be connected and proved consistent with one another.

4. Epistemology - 1 Epistemology (or theory of knowledge) is a branch of philosophy studying the nature and scope of knowledge. From the Greek words episteme (knowledge) and logos (account). Epistemology (or theory of knowledge) is a branch of philosophy studying the nature and scope of knowledge. From the Greek words episteme (knowledge) and logos (account). It focuses on analyzing the nature of knowledge and how it relates to notions such as truth, belief, and justification. It focuses on analyzing the nature of knowledge and how it relates to notions such as truth, belief, and justification. It also deals with the means of production of knowledge, and skepticism about knowledge claims. It also deals with the means of production of knowledge, and skepticism about knowledge claims. It addresses the questions: "What is knowledge?", "How is it acquired?", and "What do people know?" It addresses the questions: "What is knowledge?", "How is it acquired?", and "What do people know?"

5. Epistemology - 2 In epistemology, the kind of knowledge usually discussed is propositional knowledge, also known as "knowledge-that", as opposed to "know-how". In epistemology, the kind of knowledge usually discussed is propositional knowledge, also known as "knowledge-that", as opposed to "know-how". To exemplify: in mathematics, there is knowing that 2 + 2 = 4, but there is also knowing how to count to 4. Or, one knows how to ride a bicycle and one knows that a bicycle has two wheels. To exemplify: in mathematics, there is knowing that 2 + 2 = 4, but there is also knowing how to count to 4. Or, one knows how to ride a bicycle and one knows that a bicycle has two wheels. The distinction is between theoretical reason and practical reason, with epistemology being interested in knowledge of the theoretical kind, not the practical kind. The distinction is between theoretical reason and practical reason, with epistemology being interested in knowledge of the theoretical kind, not the practical kind.

6. Epistemology - 3 Sometimes, when people say that they believe in something, what they mean is that they predict that it will prove to be useful or successful in some sense -- perhaps someone might "believe in" his favorite football team. Sometimes, when people say that they believe in something, what they mean is that they predict that it will prove to be useful or successful in some sense -- perhaps someone might "believe in" his favorite football team. This is not the kind of belief usually dealt with in epistemology. The kind that is dealt with is that where "to believe something" just means to think that it is true -- e.g., to believe that the sky is blue is to think that the proposition "The sky is blue" is true. This is not the kind of belief usually dealt with in epistemology. The kind that is dealt with is that where "to believe something" just means to think that it is true -- e.g., to believe that the sky is blue is to think that the proposition "The sky is blue" is true.

7. Epistemology - 4 Belief is a part of knowledge. Consider someone saying, "I know that P is true, but I don't believe that P is true." Persons making this utterance, it seems, contradict themselves. If one knows P, then, among other things, one thinks that P is indeed true. If one thinks that P is true, then one believes P. Belief is a part of knowledge. Consider someone saying, "I know that P is true, but I don't believe that P is true." Persons making this utterance, it seems, contradict themselves. If one knows P, then, among other things, one thinks that P is indeed true. If one thinks that P is true, then one believes P. Knowledge is distinct from belief. If someone claims to believe something, he is claiming that it is the truth. Of course, it might turn out that he or she was mistaken, and that what was thought to be true was actually false. This is not the case with knowledge. Knowledge is distinct from belief. If someone claims to believe something, he is claiming that it is the truth. Of course, it might turn out that he or she was mistaken, and that what was thought to be true was actually false. This is not the case with knowledge.

8. Epistemology - 5 Suppose Jeff thinks a particular bridge is safe, and attempts to cross it, but the bridge collapses under his weight. We might say Jeff believed that the bridge was safe, but that his belief was mistaken. Suppose Jeff thinks a particular bridge is safe, and attempts to cross it, but the bridge collapses under his weight. We might say Jeff believed that the bridge was safe, but that his belief was mistaken. We would not (accurately) say that he knew that the bridge was safe, because plainly it was not. For something to count as knowledge it must be true. For something to count as knowledge it must be true.

9. Epistemology - 6 According to the theory that knowledge is justified true belief, in order to know that a given proposition is true, one must not only believe the relevant true proposition, but one must also have a good reason for doing so. According to the theory that knowledge is justified true belief, in order to know that a given proposition is true, one must not only believe the relevant true proposition, but one must also have a good reason for doing so. One implication of this would be that no one would gain knowledge just by believing something that happened to be true. One implication of this would be that no one would gain knowledge just by believing something that happened to be true. An ill person with no medical training but an optimistic attitude, might believe that she will recover from her illness quickly. However, even if this belief turned out to be true, the patient would not have known that she would get well, since her belief lacked justification. An ill person with no medical training but an optimistic attitude, might believe that she will recover from her illness quickly. However, even if this belief turned out to be true, the patient would not have known that she would get well, since her belief lacked justification.

10. Philosophy of science - 1 Philosophy of science is a branch of philosophy studying the philosophical assumptions, foundations, and implications of science, including the formal, natural, and social sciences. Philosophy of science is a branch of philosophy studying the philosophical assumptions, foundations, and implications of science, including the formal, natural, and social sciences. It is closely related to epistemology and the philosophy of language. It is closely related to epistemology and the philosophy of language. Issues of scientific ethics are not considered to be part of the philosophy of science; they are studied in such fields as bioethics and science studies. Issues of scientific ethics are not considered to be part of the philosophy of science; they are studied in such fields as bioethics and science studies.

11. Philosophy of science - 2 The philosophy of science tackles the topics: The philosophy of science tackles the topics: –The character and the development of concepts and terms, propositions and hypotheses, arguments and conclusions, as they function in science. –The manner in which science explains natural phenomena and predicts natural occurrences. –The types of reasoning that are used to arrive at scientific conclusions.

12. Philosophy of science - 3 –The formulation, scope, and limits of scientific method. –The means that should be used for determining the validity of scientific information, in other words, the question of objectivity. –The implications of scientific methods and models, along with the technology that arises from scientific knowledge, for the larger society.

13. Evolutionary Psychology and the Unity of Sciences – towards an evolutionary epistemology Luís Moniz Pereira Centro de Inteligência Artificial – CENTRIA Universidade Nova de Lisboa – UNL Evolutionary Psychology and the Unity of Sciences – towards an evolutionary epistemology Evolutionary Psychology and the Unity of Sciences – towards an evolutionary epistemology First Lisbon Colloquium for the Philosophy of Sciences - Unity of Sciences, Non-Traditional Approaches Lisbon, 25-28 October 2006 Lisbon, 25-28 October 2006 Philosophy of science - example

14. Abstract This work concerns a non-traditional approach to the unity of sciences, based on a challenging, albeit conjectural, articulation of views proceeding from Evolutionary Psychology and Biology, non monotonic and decision Logics, and Artificial Intelligence. This work concerns a non-traditional approach to the unity of sciences, based on a challenging, albeit conjectural, articulation of views proceeding from Evolutionary Psychology and Biology, non monotonic and decision Logics, and Artificial Intelligence. The resulting amalgam sets forth a consilience stance, wherefore the unity of science is heuristically presupposed by means of a set of pragmatic and productive default assumptions. It is by virtue of them that we conduct scientific inquiry, the consilience arising from a presumed unity of objective reality, itself of a heuristic and pragmatic conception. The resulting amalgam sets forth a consilience stance, wherefore the unity of science is heuristically presupposed by means of a set of pragmatic and productive default assumptions. It is by virtue of them that we conduct scientific inquiry, the consilience arising from a presumed unity of objective reality, itself of a heuristic and pragmatic conception. The attending hinges to Artificial Intelligence inevitably suggest the emergence of an innovative symbiotic form of evolutionary epistemology. The attending hinges to Artificial Intelligence inevitably suggest the emergence of an innovative symbiotic form of evolutionary epistemology.

15. Consilience Arguments in favour of the unity of knowledge have been strongly put by Edward Wilson, a creator of sociobiology, and author of Consilience – The Unity of Knowledge (1998). He postulates there is a single physical nature, and one not persuadable through argumentation. Science is not mere convention. Arguments in favour of the unity of knowledge have been strongly put by Edward Wilson, a creator of sociobiology, and author of Consilience – The Unity of Knowledge (1998). He postulates there is a single physical nature, and one not persuadable through argumentation. Science is not mere convention. Consilience is the result of co-evolution involving (cultural) memes and genes (see below). Our cultural memes have a genetic basis and cannot, in the long run, stand against the genes who guarantee their survival, although such attempts may potentially exist – viz. through genetic manipulation. Consilience is the result of co-evolution involving (cultural) memes and genes (see below). Our cultural memes have a genetic basis and cannot, in the long run, stand against the genes who guarantee their survival, although such attempts may potentially exist – viz. through genetic manipulation.

16. Evolution and the Brain The first bipedal primates establish the separation between the human species and the other simians. To fathom the abilities of the human brain it is necessary to understand what exactly were the problems our ancestor primates were trying to solve that led them to develop such an extraordinarily intricate brain. The first bipedal primates establish the separation between the human species and the other simians. To fathom the abilities of the human brain it is necessary to understand what exactly were the problems our ancestor primates were trying to solve that led them to develop such an extraordinarily intricate brain. We cannot look at the modern human brain, and its ability to create science, as if the millions of evolution-years which attuned it to its present configuration had never taken place. Among the eventual problems we have those of status, territorialism, mating, gregariousness, altruism vs. opportunism, building of artefacts, and the mappings of the external world. We cannot look at the modern human brain, and its ability to create science, as if the millions of evolution-years which attuned it to its present configuration had never taken place. Among the eventual problems we have those of status, territorialism, mating, gregariousness, altruism vs. opportunism, building of artefacts, and the mappings of the external world.

17. Evolutionary Pscychology Evolutionary Psychology is a consummate example of successful ongoing scientific unification, engendered by a deeply significant combination of Psychology, Anthropology, Archaeology, Evolutionary Biology, Linguistics, Neurosciences, and Artificial Intelligence (David M. Buss, 2005). Evolutionary Psychology is a consummate example of successful ongoing scientific unification, engendered by a deeply significant combination of Psychology, Anthropology, Archaeology, Evolutionary Biology, Linguistics, Neurosciences, and Artificial Intelligence (David M. Buss, 2005). Evolutionary Psychology has been studying the brain from the evolutionary perspective, thereby originating some extremely relevant contributions. In that perspective, it has been strongly supported by Anthropological Archaeology in its empirical study of the cultural evolution of mankind (Stephen Shennan, 2002). Evolutionary Psychology has been studying the brain from the evolutionary perspective, thereby originating some extremely relevant contributions. In that perspective, it has been strongly supported by Anthropological Archaeology in its empirical study of the cultural evolution of mankind (Stephen Shennan, 2002).

18. Genes and Memes In human life, we have two reproductive mechanisms: one is sexual reproduction, in which the replication unit is the gene; the other is mental reproduction. In human life, we have two reproductive mechanisms: one is sexual reproduction, in which the replication unit is the gene; the other is mental reproduction. Authors from Evolutionary Psychology have construed the notion of “meme”, in complement and contrast to the gene. A meme is that which substantiates a second reproductive system executed in the brain; the mental unit corresponding to the gene. Authors from Evolutionary Psychology have construed the notion of “meme”, in complement and contrast to the gene. A meme is that which substantiates a second reproductive system executed in the brain; the mental unit corresponding to the gene. Memes gather in assemblies, in patterns, similar to the way genes gather in chromosomes. Memes are patterned by ideologies, religions, and common sense ideas. Certain memes work well together, mutually reinforcing each other, others not, so that correcting mechanisms may be triggered. Memes gather in assemblies, in patterns, similar to the way genes gather in chromosomes. Memes are patterned by ideologies, religions, and common sense ideas. Certain memes work well together, mutually reinforcing each other, others not, so that correcting mechanisms may be triggered.

19. Science Memes In this view, scientific thought emerges from distributed personal interaction, albeit it at a spacial and temporal distance, and never in an isolated way. It must be erected from several confluences, or in teams, as is the case in science. In truth, knowledge is not constructed in an autonomous way; rather it is engendered by networks of people, and processed in appropriate environments, one being education, in which we carry out memetic proliferation. In this view, scientific thought emerges from distributed personal interaction, albeit it at a spacial and temporal distance, and never in an isolated way. It must be erected from several confluences, or in teams, as is the case in science. In truth, knowledge is not constructed in an autonomous way; rather it is engendered by networks of people, and processed in appropriate environments, one being education, in which we carry out memetic proliferation. Language is the instrument with which to fabricate knowledge together. We go so far as to state that there is no isolated consciousness, that all consciousness is distributed. When we consider consciousness we should take it out of the brain and spread it through culture; this is the importance of language. Language is the instrument with which to fabricate knowledge together. We go so far as to state that there is no isolated consciousness, that all consciousness is distributed. When we consider consciousness we should take it out of the brain and spread it through culture; this is the importance of language.

20. Archaeology Theoretical and field archaeologists, cf. Steven Mithen in The Prehistory of Mind (1996), are bringing in historical and pre- historical evidence that our ancestors began with a generic intelligence, such as we find in apes. Theoretical and field archaeologists, cf. Steven Mithen in The Prehistory of Mind (1996), are bringing in historical and pre- historical evidence that our ancestors began with a generic intelligence, such as we find in apes. There has been a broad discussion – reproduced within the Artificial Intelligence (AI) community – about whether intelligence is a general functionality or else best envisaged as divided into specific ability modules or components. There has been a broad discussion – reproduced within the Artificial Intelligence (AI) community – about whether intelligence is a general functionality or else best envisaged as divided into specific ability modules or components. Archaeologists have come to demonstrate, through their records, the human species went from a first phase of a simple general intelligence to a second phase of three major specialized modules: one for natural history and naive physics - Knowledge of Nature; one for Knowledge and Manufacture of Instruments; and one for Cultural Artefacts, i.e. the rules of living in society and the very politics of coexistence. Archaeologists have come to demonstrate, through their records, the human species went from a first phase of a simple general intelligence to a second phase of three major specialized modules: one for natural history and naive physics - Knowledge of Nature; one for Knowledge and Manufacture of Instruments; and one for Cultural Artefacts, i.e. the rules of living in society and the very politics of coexistence.

21. Specialized Modules and General Cupola These three specialized intelligences were separately developed and uncommunicating, and it is only at a newer stage – corresponding to Homo Sapiens, and the appearance of spoken language – that it becomes necessary to have a cupola module, articulating the specific ones. How else do the different specialized modules connect, and how can people - as module envelopes - communicate among themselves? These three specialized intelligences were separately developed and uncommunicating, and it is only at a newer stage – corresponding to Homo Sapiens, and the appearance of spoken language – that it becomes necessary to have a cupola module, articulating the specific ones. How else do the different specialized modules connect, and how can people - as module envelopes - communicate among themselves? That need gave birth to the generic cupola module, a much more sophisticated form of general intelligence, the cognitive glue bringing the specialized modules to communicate and cooperate. That need gave birth to the generic cupola module, a much more sophisticated form of general intelligence, the cognitive glue bringing the specialized modules to communicate and cooperate.

22. The Evolution of Reason: Logic The formal systems of logic have ordinarily been regarded as independent of biology, but recent developments in evolutionary theory suggest that biology and logic may be intimately interrelated. William S. Cooper (2001) outlines a theory of rationality in which logical law emerges as an intrinsic aspect of evolutionary biology. The formal systems of logic have ordinarily been regarded as independent of biology, but recent developments in evolutionary theory suggest that biology and logic may be intimately interrelated. William S. Cooper (2001) outlines a theory of rationality in which logical law emerges as an intrinsic aspect of evolutionary biology. This biological perspective on logic, though at present unorthodox, could change traditional ideas about the reasoning process. Cooper examines the connections between logic and evolutionary biology and illustrates how logical rules are derived directly from evolutionary principles, and therefore have no independent status of their own. This biological perspective on logic, though at present unorthodox, could change traditional ideas about the reasoning process. Cooper examines the connections between logic and evolutionary biology and illustrates how logical rules are derived directly from evolutionary principles, and therefore have no independent status of their own. Laws of decision theory, utility theory, induction, and deduction are reinterpreted as natural consequences of evolutionary processes. Cooper's connection of logical law to evolutionary theory ultimately results in a unified foundation for an evolutionary science of reason. Laws of decision theory, utility theory, induction, and deduction are reinterpreted as natural consequences of evolutionary processes. Cooper's connection of logical law to evolutionary theory ultimately results in a unified foundation for an evolutionary science of reason.