Stuart Kauffman has, in recent writings, developed a thought-provoking and influential argument for strong emergence. The outcome is his Theory of the Adjacent Possible (TAP). According to TAP, the biosphere constitutes a non-physical domain qualitatively distinct from the physical domain. The biosphere exhibits strongly emergent properties such as agency, meaning, value and creativity that cannot, in principle, be reduced to the physical. In this paper, I argue that TAP includes various (explicit or implicit) metaphysical commitments: commitments to (1) scientific realism, (2) downward causation and teleology, and (3) modal realism. If TAP is to hang together as the kind of robust philosophical thesis it evidently aspires to be, it needs an account – an account that is currently absent – of its metaphysical commitments. It is, however, unclear how such an account can be developed since various dilemmas present themselves when one explores how subscribers to TAP might do so.
BoogerdF. C., BruggemanF. J., RichardsonR. C., StephanA., and WesterhoffH. V.. 2005. “Emergence and its Place in Nature: A Case Study of Biochemical Networks. ” Synthese 145 (1): 131–164.
3.
ChakravarttyA.2007. A Metaphysics for Scientific Realism: Knowing the Unobservable . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
4.
ChakravarttyA.2017. Scientific Ontology: Integrating Naturalized Metaphysics and Voluntarist Epistemology . New York: Oxford University Press.
5.
DawkinsR.2006. The God Delusion . London: Bantam Books.
6.
DiversJ.2002. Possible Worlds . London: Routledge.
7.
GarsonJ.2016. A Critical Overview of Biological Functions . Cham: Springer.
8.
GattiR. C., KopplR., FathB. D., KauffmanS. A., HordijkW., and UlanowiczR. E.. 2020. “On the Emergence of Ecological and Economic Niches. ” Journal of Bioeconomics 22 (2): 99–127.
9.
GillettC.2016. Reduction and Emergence in Science and Philosophy . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
10.
IsmaelJ.2017. “
An Empiricist's Guide to Objective Modality. ” In Metaphysics and the Philosophy of Science: New Essays , edited by SlaterM. and YudellZ., 109–125. New York: Oxford University Press.
11.
KauffmanS. A.2000. Investigations . New York: Oxford University Press.
12.
KauffmanS. A.2008. Reinventing the Sacred: A New View of Science, Reason, and Religion . New York: Basic Books.
13.
KauffmanS. A.2016. Humanity in a Creative Universe . New York: Oxford University Press.
14.
KauffmanS. A.2019. A World Beyond Physics: The Emergence and Evolution of Life . New York: Oxford University Press.
15.
KauffmanS. A., and ClaytonP.. 2006. “On Emergence, Agency, and Organization. ” Biology and Philosophy 21 (4): 501–521.
16.
KauffmanS. A., and GareA.. 2015. “Beyond Descartes and Newton: Recovering Life and Humanity. ” Progress in Biophysics and Molecular Biology 119 (3): 219–244.
17.
LadymanJ., and RossD.. 2007. Every Thing Must Go: Metaphysics Naturalized . Oxford: Oxford University Press.
18.
LewisD. K.1986. On the Plurality of Worlds . Oxford: Blackwell.
19.
LewisD. K.2009. “
Ramseyan Humility. ” In Conceptual Analysis and Philosophical Naturalism , edited by Braddon-MitchellD. and NolaR., 203–222. Cambridge: MIT Press.
20.
LongoG., MontévilM., and KauffmanS. A.. 2012. “No Entailing Laws, but Enablement in the Evolution of the Biosphere.”
Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference Companion, 1379–1392. Philadelphia: ACM.
21.
MayrE.1988. “
The Multiple Meanings of Teleological. ” In Towards a New Philosophy of Biology , edited by MayrErnst, 38–66. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
22.
MeinongA.1960. “
The Theory of Objects. ” In Realism and the Background of Phenomenology , edited by ChisholmR., translated by I. Levi and D. B. Terrell,
76–117. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.
23.
NagelT.2012. Mind and Cosmos: Why the Materialism Neo-Darwinian Conception of Nature is Almost Certainly False . New York: Oxford University Press.
24.
NobleD.2006. The Music of Life: Biology Beyond Genes . Oxford: Oxford University Press.
25.
OkashaS.2012. “Emergence, Hierarchy and Top-Down Causation in Evolutionary Biology. ” Interface Focus: A Theme Supplement of Journal of the Royal Society Interface 2 (1): 49–54.
26.
PsillosS.1999. Scientific Realism: How Science Tracks Truth . London: Routledge.
RossD., LadymanJ., and KincaidH.. 2013. Scientific Metaphysics . Oxford: Oxford University Press.
29.
SankeyH.2001. “Scientific Realism: An Elaboration and a Defence. ” Theoria, a Journal of Social and Political Theory 98 (1): 35–54.
30.
SmolinL.1997. The Life of the Cosmos . New York: Oxford University Press.
31.
Van FraassenB. C.1980. The Scientific Image . Oxford: Oxford University Press.
32.
Van der Merwe. 2020. “Enablement, the Adjacent Possible and the Becoming of the Biosphere. ” Metascience 29 (2): 279–282.
33.
Van der Merwe, R. 2021. “On Paul Cilliers’ Approach to Complexity: Post-Structuralism Versus Model Exclusivity.” INDECS: Interdisciplinary Description of Complex Systems 19 (4): 457–469.
34.
YagisawaT.2010. Worlds and Individuals, Possible and Otherwise . New York: Oxford University Press.
