<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!DOCTYPE article  PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing DTD v3.0 20080202//EN" "http://dtd.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/3.0/journalpublishing3.dtd"><article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" dtd-version="3.0" xml:lang="en" article-type="research article"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">OJPP</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title>Open Journal of Philosophy</journal-title></journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">2163-9434</issn><publisher><publisher-name>Scientific Research Publishing</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.4236/ojpp.2014.41007</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">OJPP-42692</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Articles</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="Discipline-v2"><subject>Social Sciences&amp;Humanities</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>
 
 
  Kant’s Emergence and Sellarsian Cognitive Science
 
</article-title></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>ichard</surname><given-names>McDonough</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sub>1</sub></xref><xref ref-type="corresp" rid="cor1"><sup>*</sup></xref></contrib></contrib-group><aff id="aff1"><label>1</label><addr-line>Singapore Campus, The Arium Academy, Singapore City, Singapore</addr-line></aff><author-notes><corresp id="cor1">* E-mail:<email>rmm249@cornell.edu</email></corresp></author-notes><pub-date pub-type="epub"><day>26</day><month>01</month><year>2014</year></pub-date><volume>04</volume><issue>01</issue><fpage>44</fpage><lpage>53</lpage><history><date date-type="received"><day>November</day>	<month>5th,</month>	<year>2013</year></date><date date-type="rev-recd"><day>December</day>	<month>5th,</month>	<year>2013</year>	</date><date date-type="accepted"><day>December</day>	<month>12th,</month>	<year>2013</year></date></history><permissions><copyright-statement>&#169; Copyright  2014 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc. </copyright-statement><copyright-year>2014</copyright-year><license><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution International License (CC BY). http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</license-p></license></permissions><abstract><p>
 
 
   The paper argues, against current views that see Kant as giving abstract descriptions of cognitive mechanisms (after the fashion of functionalism in cognitive science), that Kant sees mental phenomena as akin to emergent phenomena in a sense traditionally opposed to mechanism. After distinguishing several relevant notions of emergence, the paper distinguishes several of Kant’s basic emergentist theses, including his emergent materialism in chemistry and a species of mental emergence modelled on that chemical emergence. However, Kant’s doctrine of the epigenesis of pure Reason is argued to be Kant’s most fundamental emergentist thesis. The paper argues that Kant’s notion of mental emergence sheds light on some very puzzling aspects of his remarks about the unity of intuition and concept emphasized by Wilfrid Sellars. The paper sketches some of the problems in contemporary cognitive science and shows how a Sellarsian emergentism inspired by Kant addresses some of these problems and provides an interesting alternative to the kind of mechanistic positions that have tended to dominate the field. Finally, the paper locates the present emergentist reading with respect to the perspectivist reading of Kant. 
 
</p></abstract><kwd-group><kwd>Kant; Sellars; Emergentism; Functionalism; Epigenesis</kwd></kwd-group></article-meta></front><back><ref-list><title>References</title><ref id="scirp.42692-ref1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation publication-type="book" xlink:type="simple">Achim, S. (1992). Emergence—A systematic view on its historical facets. In A. B. Kim and J. H. Flores (Eds.), Emergence or Reduction? (pp. 25-48). Berlin: De Gruyter.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Adler, I., &amp; Adler, R. (1962). Thinking machines. New York: Signet.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Alexander, S. I. (1920). Space, time, and deity. London: Macmillan.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Allen, R. (1966). Greek philosophy: Thales to Aristotle. New York: The Free Press.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Allison, H. (2004). Kant’s transcendental idealism: An interpretation and defense. New Haven: Yale University Press.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Aristotle (2001). Metaphysics, the basic works of Aristotle. New York: Modern Library.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Bergson, H. (1944). Creative evolution. New York: Random House.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Bogen, J., &amp; Woodward, J. (1988). Saving the phenomena. Philosophical Review, 97, 303-352. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2185445</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation publication-type="book" xlink:type="simple">Breitenbach, A. (2011). Kant on causal knowledge: Causality, mechanism and reflective judgment. In K. Allen, &amp; T. Stoneham (Eds.), Causation and Modern Philosophy (pp. 201-219). London: Routledge.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Brighton, H. (2008). Introducing artificial intelligence. Portland, ME: Totem Books.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Brook, A. (1994). Kant and the mind. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511624629</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Brook, A. (2008). Kant’s view of the mind and consciousness of the self. Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy.http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-mind/</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Buchdahl, G. (1992). Kant and the dynamics of reason. Oxford: Blackwell.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Bunge</surname><given-names> M. </given-names></name>,<etal>et al</etal>. (<year>1977</year>)<article-title>. Emergence and the mind</article-title><source> Neuroscience</source><volume> 2</volume>,<fpage> 501</fpage>-<lpage>509</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi"></pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Chrucky, A. (2008). An interview with David Armstrong about W. Sellars. Mikolka-Inquiries. http://mikolka-inquiries.blogspot.mx/2008/11/interview-with-david-armstrong-about-w.html</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Churchland, P. S. (1986). Neurophilosophy. Cambridge: MIT Press.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation publication-type="book" xlink:type="simple">Clayton, P. (2008). Conceptual foundations of emergence theory. In Paul, D., &amp; Philip, C. (Eds.), The re-emergence of emergence: The emergentist hypothesis from science and religion (pp. 1-31). Oxford: Oxford University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199544318.003.0001</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Corradini, A., &amp; O’Connor (2010). Timothy, emergence in science and philosophy. New York: Routledge.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">D’Abro, A. (1939). The decline of mechanism in modern physics. D. Van Nostrand Company, Inc.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">29The reason the present author does not embrace the perspectivist reading tout court is, roughly, due to some uncertainty whether the various perspectives in Kant’s system can be combined into a completely consistent system without some modifications.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">30As the present author understands this, the place for Hegel’s famed opposition to dualisms, including, ironically, his opposition to the various Kantian dualisms (Sedgwick, 2012, 6-8, 107, 159, etc.), is already prepared in Kant’s system of perspectives, but this must be a matter for another occasion.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Dartnall, T. (1996). Cognitive science and the crisis it is facing. Metascience, 5, 95-105. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF02988881</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Davidson, D. (1999). The emergence of thought. Erkentnis, 51, 511521. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1005564223855</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation publication-type="book" xlink:type="simple">Davies, P. (2008). Preface to the re-emergence of emergence: The emergentist hypothesis from science and religion, Paul Davies and Philip Clayton (Eds.), (pp. xi-xiv). Oxford: Oxford University Press.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">31As the present author understands this point, the need for a multi-faceted perspectivist account derives from the unique nature of a living organism.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">32It would not be possible to dedicate this paper to anyone other than the one and only Wilfrid Sellars.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Dennett, D. (1981). Brainstorms. Cambridge: MIT.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Dreyfus, H. (1993). What computers still can’t do. Cambridge: MIT.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Eiser, J. R. (1991). Attitudes, chaos, and the connectionist mind. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref30"><label>30</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Engels, F. (1994). Ludwig feuerbach and the end of classical german philosophy. Marx-Engels Internet Archive.http://marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1886/ludwig-feuerbach/index.htm</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref31"><label>31</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Fancher, R. (1990). Pioneers of psychology. New York: Norton.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref32"><label>32</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Fodor, J. (1979). The language of thought. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref33"><label>33</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Fodor, J. (1987). Psychosemantics: The problem of meaning in the philosophy of mind. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref34"><label>34</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Fodor, J. (1998). Concepts: Where cognitive science went wrong. Oxford: Oxford University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/0198236360.001.0001</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref35"><label>35</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Fodor, J. (2001). The mind doesn’t work that way. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref36"><label>36</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Ginsborg, H. (2013). Kant’s aesthetics and teleology. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-aesthetics/</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref37"><label>37</label><mixed-citation publication-type="book" xlink:type="simple">Goldberg, B. (1983). Mechanism and meaning. In C. Ginet, &amp; S. Shoemaker (Eds.), Knowledge and Mind (pp. 191-210). Oxford: Oxford University Press.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref38"><label>38</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Goudge, T. A. (1967). Emergent-evolutionism. In The encyclopedia of philosophy, vol. 2 (pp. 474-477). New York: Collier-Macmillan.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref39"><label>39</label><mixed-citation publication-type="book" xlink:type="simple">van Guick, R. (1992). Non-reductive physicalism and the nature of theoretic constraint. In J. Kim, A. Beckermann, &amp; H. Flores (Eds.), Emergence or reduction (pp. 157-179). Berlin: Walter De Gruyter.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref40"><label>40</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Hansson, S. (2008). Science and pseudo science. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/pseudo-science/</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref41"><label>41</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Hasker, W. (1999). The emergent self. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref42"><label>42</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Hegel, G. F. W. (1979). Phenomenology of spirit. Oxford: Oxford University Press.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref43"><label>43</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Heidegger, M. (1962). Kant and the problem of metaphysics. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref44"><label>44</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Hempel, C. (1965). Aspects of scientific explanation. New York: Free Press.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref45"><label>45</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Hodges, A. (2013). Alan Turing. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/turing/#MacInt</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref46"><label>46</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Kant, I. (1950). Prolegomena to any future metaphysics. New York: Bobbs-Merrill.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref47"><label>47</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Kant, I. (1968). Critique is the critique of judgement. New York: Harper.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref48"><label>48</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Kant, I. (1969). Critique of pure reason. New York: St Martin’s Press.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref49"><label>49</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Kant, I. (1970). Metaphysical foundations of natural science. Indianapolis, IN: Bobbs-Merrill.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref50"><label>50</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Kant, I. (1983). What is Enlightenment? In Perpetual peace and other essays (pp. 41-48). Indianapolis, IN: Hackett.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref51"><label>51</label><mixed-citation publication-type="book" xlink:type="simple">Kant, I. (1996). Anthropology from a practical point of view. In V. Dowdell (Ed.), Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref52"><label>52</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Kant, I. (1998). Opus postumum. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref53"><label>53</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Kant, I. (2004). Critique of practical reason. New York: Dover.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref54"><label>54</label><mixed-citation publication-type="book" xlink:type="simple">Kim, J. Downward causation. In J. Kim, A. Beckermann, &amp; H. Flores (Eds.), Emergence or reduction (pp. 119-138). Berlin: De Gruyter.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref55"><label>55</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Kim, J. (1993). Supervenience and mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511625220</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref56"><label>56</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Kitcher, Patricia (1984). Discovering the forms of intuition. The Philosophical Review, XCVI, 205-248.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref57"><label>57</label><mixed-citation publication-type="book" xlink:type="simple">Kitcher, Patricia (1990a). Kant’s dedicated cognitive system. In J. C. Smith (Ed.), Historical Foundations of Cognitive Science (pp. 189209). New York: Springer.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref58"><label>58</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Kitcher, Patricia (1990b). Kant’s transcendental psychology. New York: Oxford University Press.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref59"><label>59</label><mixed-citation publication-type="book" xlink:type="simple">Kitcher, Philip (1982). How Kant almost wrote “Two Dogmas of Empiricism”. In J. N. Mohanty, &amp; R. Shahane (Eds.), Essays on Kant’s critique of pure reason (pp. 217-250). Norman: University of Oklahoma Press.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref60"><label>60</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Levin, J. (2013). Functionalism. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/functionalism/</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref61"><label>61</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Lowe, E. J. (2000). Causal closure principles and emergentism. Philosophy, 75, 571-585. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S003181910000067X</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref62"><label>62</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Margolis, J. (1986). Emergence. The Philosophical Forum, XVII, 271295.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref63"><label>63</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Margolis, J. (1987). Science without unity. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref64"><label>64</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">McDonough, R. (1995). Kant’s historicist alternative to cognitive science. The Southern Journal of Philosophy, 33, 203-219. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.2041-6962.1995.tb00740.x</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref65"><label>65</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>McDonough</surname><given-names> R. </given-names></name>,<etal>et al</etal>. (<year>1997</year>)<article-title>. Heidegger on Kant on the alternative to the scientism of the Enlightenment</article-title><source> The Journal for the British Society of Phenomenology</source><volume> 28</volume>,<fpage> 236</fpage>-<lpage>254</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi"></pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref66"><label>66</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>McDonough</surname><given-names> R. </given-names></name>,<etal>et al</etal>. (<year>1998</year>)<article-title>. Kant’s anti-scientism and the origins of phenomenology</article-title><source> The Journal for the British Society of Phenomenology</source><volume> 29</volume>,<fpage> 236</fpage>-<lpage>254</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi"></pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref67"><label>67</label><mixed-citation publication-type="book" xlink:type="simple">McDonough, R. (1999a). Introduction to Wittgenstein and cognitive science. In R. McDonough (Ed.), Idealistic Studies, 29, 125-138.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref68"><label>68</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>McDonough</surname><given-names> R. </given-names></name>,<etal>et al</etal>. (<year>1999b</year>)<article-title>. Bringing cognitive science back to life</article-title><source> Idealistic Studies</source><volume> 29</volume>,<fpage> 173</fpage>-<lpage>213</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi"></pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref69"><label>69</label><mixed-citation publication-type="book" xlink:type="simple">McDonough, R. (2002). Emergence and creativity: Five degrees of freedom. In T. Dartnall (Ed.), Creativity, cognition, and knowledge (pp. 283-320). Westport, CT: Praeger.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref70"><label>70</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">McDonough, R. (2006). Martin Heidegger’s being and time. New York: Peter Lang.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref71"><label>71</label><mixed-citation publication-type="journal" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>McDonough</surname><given-names> R. </given-names></name>,<etal>et al</etal>. (<year>2011</year>)<article-title>. A synoptic view of Kant’s emergentism</article-title><source> Iyyun</source><volume> 60</volume>,<fpage> 245</fpage>-<lpage>274</lpage>.<pub-id pub-id-type="doi"></pub-id></mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref72"><label>72</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">McGinn, C. (1989). Can we solve the mind-body problem? Mind, 98, 349-366. http://art-mind.org/review/IMG/pdf/McGinn_1989_Mind-body-problem_M.pdf</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref73"><label>73</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">McGinn, C. (2004). Consciousness, atomism, and the ancient Greeks. In Consciousness and its objects (pp. 115-135). Oxford: Oxford University Press. http://consc.net/neh/papers/mcginn1.doc</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref74"><label>74</label><mixed-citation publication-type="book" xlink:type="simple">McLaughlin, B. (1992). The rise and fall of British emergentism. In J. Kim, A. Beckermann, &amp; H. Flores (Eds.), Emergence or reduction (pp. 49-93). Berlin: De Gruyter.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref75"><label>75</label><mixed-citation publication-type="book" xlink:type="simple">Meerbote, R. (1990). Kant’s functionalism. In J. C. Smith (Ed.), Historical foundations of cognitive science (pp. 161-188). New York: Springer.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref76"><label>76</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Mill, J. S. (1999). Logic of the moral sciences. Indianapolis: Open Court.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref77"><label>77</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Moore, G. E. (1994). Principia ethica. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref78"><label>78</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Morgan, L. (1923). Emergent evolution. London: Williams and Norgate.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref79"><label>79</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Mourelatos, A. (1986). Quality, structure, and emergence in later presocratic philosophy. Proceedings in Boston Colloquium in Ancient Philosophy, 2, 127-194. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/2213441786X00129</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref80"><label>80</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Nagel, E. (1979). The structure of science. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref81"><label>81</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">O’Connor, T. (2012). Emergent properties. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/properties-emergent/</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref82"><label>82</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Palmquist, S. (1993). Kant’s system of perspectives. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref83"><label>83</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Palmquist, S. (2007). Emergence, evolution, and the geometry of logic: The myth of historical development. Foundations of Science, 12, 937. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10699-006-0004-1</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref84"><label>84</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Pears, D. (1987). The false prison. Vol. I, Oxford: Oxford University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/0198247702.001.0001</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref85"><label>85</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Pepper, S. (1926). Emergence. Journal of Philosophy, 23, 241-245.http://www.ditext.com/pepper/emerge.htmlhttp://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2014779</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref86"><label>86</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Pinker, S. (2013). Language, cognition, and human nature: Selected articles. New York: Oxford University Press.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref87"><label>87</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Pluher, W. (1987). Introduction and notes to Kant, Immanuel. Critique of judgment. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref88"><label>88</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Popper, K. (1950). The open society and its enemies. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref89"><label>89</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Popper, K. (1961). The poverty of historicism. New York: Harper.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref90"><label>90</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Popper, K. (1972). Objective knowledge. Oxford: Oxford University Press.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref91"><label>91</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Popper, K. (2002). Unended quest. New York: Routledge.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref92"><label>92</label><mixed-citation publication-type="book" xlink:type="simple">Putnam, H. (1964). Minds and machines. In A. R. Anderson (Ed.), Minds and machines (pp. 72-97). Engelwood Cliffs, NJ: PrenticeHall.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref93"><label>93</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Quine, W. V. (1951). Two dogmas of empiricism. Philosophical Review, 60, 20-43. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2181906</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref94"><label>94</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Reid, R. (2007). Biological emergences: Evolution by natural experiment. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref95"><label>95</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Rockwell, W. T. (2007). Neither brain nor ghost. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref96"><label>96</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Rosenberg, J. (2009). Wilfrid Sellars. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/sellars/</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref97"><label>97</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Rueger, A. (2000). Physical emergence: Synchronic and diachronic. Synthese, 124, 297-322. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1005249907425</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref98"><label>98</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Russell, B. (1992). The analysis of matter. Cornwall: Routledge &amp; Kegan Paul.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref99"><label>99</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Savin, H. B. (1973). A review of Katz’s semantic analysis. Cognition, 2, 212-238. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(72).90012-1</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref100"><label>100</label><mixed-citation publication-type="book" xlink:type="simple">Schrader, G. (1967a). Kant’s theory of concepts. In R. P. Wolff (Ed.), Kant: A collection of critical essays (pp. 134-155). New York: Doubleday.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref101"><label>101</label><mixed-citation publication-type="book" xlink:type="simple">Schrader, G. (1967b). The Thing-in-itself in Kantian philosophy. In R. P. Wolff (Ed.), Kant: A collection of critical essays (172-188). New York: Doubleday-Anchor.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref102"><label>102</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Searle, J. (1983). Intentionality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139173452</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref103"><label>103</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Searle, J. (1980). Minds, brains, and programs. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 3, 417-457. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00005756</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref104"><label>104</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Sedgwick, S. (2012). Hegel’s critique of Kant: From dichotomy to identity. Oxford: Oxford University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199698363.001.0001</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref105"><label>105</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Seibt, J. (1990). Properties as processes. Atascadero, CA: Ridgeview.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref106"><label>106</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Sellars, R. W. (1970). Principles of emergent realism. St. Louis, MO: Warren H. Green.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref107"><label>107</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Sellars, W. (1949). Aristotelian philosophies of mind. Philosophy for the future: Quest for modern materialism (pp. 544-570). New York: Macmillan. http://www.ditext.com/sellars/apm.html</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref108"><label>108</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Sellars, W. (1991a). Philosophy and the scientific image of man. Science, perception, and reality (pp. 1-40). Atascadero, CA: Ridgeview.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref109"><label>109</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Sellars, W. (1991). “Phenomenalism”. In Science, perception and reality (pp. 60-105). Atascadero, CA: Ridgeview.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref110"><label>110</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Sellars, W. (1968). Science and metaphysics. New York: Routledge and Kegan Paul.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref111"><label>111</label><mixed-citation publication-type="book" xlink:type="simple">Sellars, W., &amp; Meehl, P. E. (1956). The concept of emergence. Vol. l. In H. Feigl, &amp; M. Scriven (Eds.), Minnesota studies in the philosophy of science (pp. 239-252). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref112"><label>112</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Shoemaker, S. (2002). Kim on Emergence. Philosophical Studies, 58, 53-63. http://philpapers.org/s/sydney%20shoemaker</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref113"><label>113</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Strawson, P. (1963). Individuals. New York: Doubleday and Co.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref114"><label>114</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Strawson, P. (1968). The bounds of sense. London: Metheun.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref115"><label>115</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Wallace, W. (1894). Prolegomena to the study of Hegel’s philosophy. Oxford: Clarendon Press.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref116"><label>116</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Watson, J. (1892). Schelling’s transcendental idealism. Chicago, IL: S. C. Griggs &amp; Company.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref117"><label>117</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Weiskopf, D. (2011). Models and mechanisms in psychological explanation. Synthese, 183, 313-338. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11229-011-9958-9</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref118"><label>118</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Whitehead, A. N. (1967). Science and the modern world. New York: The Free Press.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref119"><label>119</label><mixed-citation publication-type="book" xlink:type="simple">Whitehead, A. N. (1978). Process and reality. In D. Griffin, &amp; D. Sherburne (Eds.), New York: Free Press.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref120"><label>120</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Wittgenstein, L. (1980). Culture and value. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.42692-ref121"><label>121</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Zumbach, C. (1984). The transcendent science: Kant's conception of biological methodology. The Hague, Boston, Lancaster: MartinusNijhoff. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-6104-3</mixed-citation></ref></ref-list></back></article>