Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

Human Affairs

Postdisciplinary Humanities & Social Sciences Quarterly

Editor-in-Chief: Višnovský, Emil

Ed. by Bianchi, Gabriel / Hrubec, Marek / Tartaglia, James


CiteScore 2016: 0.33

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2016: 0.172
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2016: 0.415

Online
ISSN
1337-401X
See all formats and pricing
More options …
Volume 23, Issue 4

Issues

Scientific realism and philosophical naturalism in Šmajs’ evolutionary ontology

Inéz Melichová / Robert Burgan
Published Online: 2013-09-28 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/s13374-013-0149-x

Abstract

J. Šmajs’ concept of evolutionary ontology has attracted much attention in recent years especially in Czech and Slovak academic circles, yet it remains, as some of its proponents claim, undervalued in Britain and the US. Even in the Czech Republic and Slovakia, there are, in addition to its strong supporters, several authors who almost a priori reject the concept, pointing to several questionable, contradictory or even mutually exclusive or self-refuting arguments. In this paper, mainly based on a comprehensive analysis of the first part of Šmajs’ book, Evoluční ontologie kultury a problém podnikání (2012) [Evolutionary Ontology of Culture and The Issues Of Business], we attempt to demonstrate that the opponents of Šmajs’ concept are closer to the truth, since the concept, we believe, is just another variation on the extreme escalation of philosophical naturalism.

Keywords: biological evolution; natural evolution; cultural evolution; cosmic development in its original meaning; development of the universe; development in the universe; human nature

  • [1] Arendt, H. (1958). The Human Condition. Chicago-London: University of Chicago Press. Google Scholar

  • [2] Arendtová, H. (1996). Původ totalitarismu I–III. [The Origins of Totalitarianism]. Praha: Oikoymenh. Google Scholar

  • [3] Ayala, F. J. (2008). Human Evolution: The Three Grand Challenges of Human Biology. In D. L. Hull, M. Ruse (Eds.). The Cambridge Companion to the Philosophy of Biology, pp. 233–254. Cambridge-New York: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar

  • [4] Ayala, F. J. (2010). What the Biological Sciences Can and Cannot Contribute to Ethics. In F. J. Ayala, R. Arp (Eds.). Contemporary Debates in Philosophy of Biology, pp. 316–336. Malden-Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. Google Scholar

  • [5] Beran, O. (2011). Jazyk, barvy a matematizace? [Language, Colors and Mathematization?] In P. Kůrka, A. Matoušek, B. Velický et al. (Eds.). Spor o matematizaci světa [The Debate on the Mathematization of the World], pp. 243–260. Praha: Pavel Mervart. Google Scholar

  • [6] Brugger, W. (1994). Filosofický slovník. [Philosophical Dictionary]. Praha: Naše vojsko. Google Scholar

  • [7] Burgan, R. (2013). Základy globálnej evolucioniky. [Basics of Global Evolutionism]. Bratislava: IRIS. Google Scholar

  • [8] Cetl, J., Hubík, S., Šmajs, J. (1990). Příroda a kultura. [Nature and Culture]. Praha: Svoboda. Google Scholar

  • [9] Chaisson, E. J. (2000). The Emerging Life Era: A Cosmological Imperative. In G. A. Lemarchand, K. J. Meech (Eds.). Bioastronomy’ 99. A New Era in Bioastronomy, pp. 35–41. San Francisco: Astronomical Society of the Pacific. Google Scholar

  • [10] Cmorej, P. (2001). Na pomedzí logiky a filozofie. [Between Logic and Philosophy]. Bratislava: VEDA. Google Scholar

  • [11] Černík, V. (1986). Systém kategórií materialistickej dialektiky. [Categories of Dialectical Materialism]. Bratislava: Pravda. Google Scholar

  • [12] Černík, V., Viceník, J. (2011). Úvod do metodológie spoločenských vied. [An Introduction to Methodology in the Social Sciences]. Bratislava: IRIS. Google Scholar

  • [13] Ellis, B. (2001). Scientific Essentialism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar

  • [14] Ellis, B. (2002). The Philosophy of Nature. A Guide to the New Essentialism. Chesham: Acumen. Google Scholar

  • [15] Frolov, I. T. (1989). Filozofický slovník. [Philosophical Dictionary]. Bratislava: Pravda. Google Scholar

  • [16] Goldsmith, T. H. (1994). The Biological Roots of Human Nature. Forging Links between Evolution and Behavior. New York-Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google Scholar

  • [17] Landsberg, P. T. (1984). Can entropy and „order” increase together? Physics Letters 102A, 171–173. Google Scholar

  • [18] Markoš, A. (1997). Cultura contra natura. Civilizace jako nebiotický systém biosféry? [Cultura contra natura. Civilization as an Abiotic Biosphere System?]. Vesmír 76, 623–626. Google Scholar

  • [19] Nosek, J. (1997). Mysl a tělo v analytické filosofii. Úvod do teorií psychofyzického problému. [Mind and Body in Analytic Philosophy. An Introduction to the Theories of Psychophysical Issues]. Praha: Filosofia. Google Scholar

  • [20] Palovičová, Z. (1994). Pojem príroda ako metodologický problém. [The Concept of Nature as a Methodological Problem]. Životné prostredie 28, 137–138. Google Scholar

  • [21] Poršnev, B. F. (1979). O začiatkoch ľudských dejín. [The Beginnings of Human History]. Bratislava: Pravda. Google Scholar

  • [22] Rosa, A. (2006). Vydavateľstvo PRO. [The Publishing House PRO]. Knižná revue XVI., 26., 8. Google Scholar

  • [23] Rosslenbroich, B. (2009). The Theory of Increasing Autonomy in Evolution: A Proposal for Understanding Macroevolutionary Innovations. Biology&Philosophy 24, 623–644. Web of ScienceGoogle Scholar

  • [24] Rubcov, V. V., Ursul, A. D. (1984). Problema vnezemnych civilizacij. Filosofsko-metodologičeskie aspekty. Kišinev: Štiinca. Google Scholar

  • [25] Ruse, M. (2010). The Biological Sciences Can Act as a Ground for Ethics. In F. J. Ayala, R. Arp (Eds.). Contemporary Debates in Philosophy of Biology, pp. 297–315. Malden-Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell. Google Scholar

  • [26] Schenk, J. (2011). Problém emergencie: silná, slabá a semisilná emergencia. [The Problem of Emergence: Strong, Weak and Semi-Strong Eemergence] In J. Šuch (Ed.). K otázkam metodologie vied (spoločenských a prírodných). [On the Issues of Methodology of Sciences (Social and Natural)]. Banská Bystrica: Fakulta humanitných vied Univerzity Mateja Bela. Google Scholar

  • [27] Searle, J. R. (2007). Myseľ, jazyk, spoločnosť. [Mind, Language and Society]. Bratislava: Kalligram. Google Scholar

  • [28] Skalský, M. (1991). Je súčasná kozmológia vývinovou teóriou? [Is the Contemporary Cosmology a Developmental Theory?] In J. Dubnička (Ed.). Vesmír a vývoj. [Universe and Development]. Bratislava: Filozofický ústav SAV. Google Scholar

  • [29] Stanko, V. (1989). Úrovne živého a dialektika. [The Levels of the Living and Dialectic]. Filozofia 44, 710–723. Google Scholar

  • [30] Storch, D. (1997). Ekologická katastrofa: co víme a co nevíme. (N kolik poznámek nad knihou „Konflikt přirozené a kulturní evoluce”). [Environmental Disaster: What We Know and What We Do Not Know. (A Few Notes on the Book “Conflict of Natural and Cultural Evolution”)]. Vesmír 76, 627. Google Scholar

  • [31] Šmajs, J., Krob, J. (1991). Úvod do ontologie. [An Introduction to Ontology]. Brno: Masarykova univerzita. Google Scholar

  • [32] Šmajs, J. (1995). Ohrožená kultura. [Threatened Culture]. Brno: Zvláštní vydání. Google Scholar

  • [33] Šmajs, J. (1997). Konflikt přirozené a kulturní evoluce. [Conflict of Natural and Cultural Evolution]. Brno: Masarykova univerzita. Google Scholar

  • [34] Šmajs, J., Krob, J. (2003). Evoluční ontologie. [Evolutionary Ontology]. Brno: Masarykova universita. Google Scholar

  • [35] Šmajs, J. (2006). Ohrozená kultúra. [Threatened Culture]. Banská Bystrica: PRO. Google Scholar

  • [36] Šmajs, J. (2008). Filosofie — obrat k Zemi. [Philosophy — The Turn to the Earth]. Praha: Academia. Google Scholar

  • [37] Šmajs, J. (2009). K podstatě evoluční ontologie. [The Essence of Evolutionary Ontology]. Filozofia 64, 324–338. Google Scholar

  • [38] Šmajs, J. (2012). Evoluční ontologie kultury a problém podnikání [Evolutionary Ontology of Culture and the Issues of Business]. Brno: Doplněk, Masarykova univerzita. Google Scholar

  • [39] Trigilia, C. (2002). Economic Sociology. State, Market, and Society in Modern Capitalism. Oxford: Blackwell. Google Scholar

  • [40] Višňovský, E. (2006). Príroda ako subjekt. Šmajsova evolučno-ontologická fundácia ekofilozofie. [Nature as a Subject. Šmajs’ Evolutionary-Ontological Foundation of Ecophilosophy]. In J. Šmajs Ohrozená kultúra. [Threatened Culture] Banská Bystrica: PRO. Google Scholar

  • [41] Wiesmeth, H. (2012). Environmental Economy. Theory and Policy in Equilibrium. Berlin-Heidelberg: Springer. Google Scholar

  • [42] Wilson, E. O. (1993). O lidské přirozenosti. Máme svobodnou vůli, nebo je naše chování řízeno genetickým kódem? [On Human Nature. Do We Have Free Will, or Is Our Behavior Controlled by the Genetic Code?] Praha: Nakladatelství Lidové noviny. Google Scholar

  • [43] Zubkov, I. F. (1981). Problém geologickej formy pohybu hmoty. [The Issues of Geological Forms of Motion of Matter]. Bratislava: Pravda. Google Scholar

About the article

Published Online: 2013-09-28

Published in Print: 2013-10-01


Citation Information: Human Affairs, Volume 23, Issue 4, Pages 556–575, ISSN (Online) 1337-401X, ISSN (Print) 1210-3055, DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/s13374-013-0149-x.

Export Citation

© 2013 Institute for Research in Social Communication, Slovak Academy of Sciences. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License. BY-NC-ND 3.0

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in