Jaegwon KimIn hmolscience, Jaegwon Kim (1934-) is a Korean-born American physicalism philosopher, notable for his positions on: downward causation, nonreductive physicalism, mind-body problem, consciousness amid materialism, emergence, supervenience, among others.

Overview
(add)



Human movement?
In 1992, Kim, in his “Downward Causation in Emergentism and Nonreductive Physicalism”, asks the following straightforward question: [1]



Scenario: “It occurs to you that you need to check a few references for an article you are writing, so you decide to walk over to the library after your office hours. Miracle of miracles! In half an hour, you find your body, all of it, at the front steps of the library, half a mile away. Think of all the molecules that make up your body: each of them has traversed the half-mile, zigzag path from your office to the library, and your whole body is now where it is.”

Question: “What explains the spatial displacement of your body from the office to the library? What caused the motion of each and every molecule of your body over the half-mile path?”
Office Library walk (diagram)

This, comparatively speaking, is a fairly decent hmolscience-type homework problem. The root of the answer, of course, is found in the opening paragraph of German physicist Rudolf Clausius’ 1875 “Mathematical Introduction” chapter, of his The Mechanical Theory of Heat, the foundation stone of thermodynamics, as follows:

“Every force tends to give motion to the body on which it acts; but it may be prevented from doing so by other opposing forces, so that equilibrium results, and the body remains at rest. In this case the force performs no work. But as soon as the body moves under the influence of the force, work is performed.”

The body in question here is the human or human molecule in technical speak. To clarify, the following shows the old and now defunct theory classified 2000 Merriam-Webster Collegiate Dictionary definition of a human as compared to the new accurate chemical thermodynamically neutral 2011 Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics textbook definition of a human (citation: Libb Thims, 2002): [7]


Human

Date
Source







Old vr “A bipedal primate mammal (Homo sapiens); broadly : any living or extinct member of the family (Hominidae) to which the primate belongs.” human (baby) small2000Merriam-Webster Collegiate Dictionary






New vr “A 26-element energy/heat driven dynamic atomic structure.” human (baby) Hu2011Advanced Engineering Thermodynamics

the latter baby shown with the "Hu" human element symbol overlaid, the difference between the two being that the term "living" is not found in the latter: the former of which (old view) being crouched vicariously in 5,000-year-old religio-mythology based "life theory"; the latter (new view) being chemically and thermodynamically neutral in terminology and definition (see: life terminology upgrades). The following, to give some comparative basis with which to get one's bearings, shows a walking molecule, specifically a video animation and image of the walking molecule "kinesin", characteristically compared to a a walking human (human molecule), energetically walking with two molecular legs, along a protofilament of a microtubule, for Ronald Vale and Ronald Milligan’s 2000 article “The Way Things Move”: [8]

Walking molecule (human and kinesin)human molecule (carring bundle)
Left: a 1999 animation of the walking molecule "kinesin" energetically walking, with two molecular legs, along a protofilament of a microtubule in for the article “The Way Things Move.” [8] Center: a walking kinesin (right), carrying a large load along a microtubule. [6] Right: a walking 26-element human molecule carrying a bundle. The ignorant person will tend to argue that the underlying principle behind the movement of each respective bundle-carrying animated atomic geometry, kinesin and human, respectively, is somehow different; the learned individual, however, will know that chemical thermodynamics sees one point of view to explain the movement of each: namely energy will be conserved and entropy will increase, for each respective process—which translated to the affect that for movement to accrue a free energy coupling action must take place; as the video explains, the movement principles of the smaller molecule, kinesin, have been largely worked out, utilizing ATP / phosphate bond energy release explanations; a logic mostly derived from German physical chemist Fritz Haber's extension of American physical chemist Gilbert Lewis’ chemical thermodynamics work applied to the problem of muscle contraction. The explanation for movement in the human molecule case, is but the same, the details of which are but an extrapolation issue.


The force in question here is the electromagnetic force. This latter point is a strangely peculiar technical detail often neglected from the studies of modern physical hard science students? Whatever the case, Kim, not being schooled in the logic of Clausius—which is the case for anyone not having gone through engineering school—and in turn the science of chemical thermodynamics, and in turn the understanding that a human is a molecule—a 26-element animated heat-driven surface-attached bound state turnover rate freely-going molecule (see: human molecular formula), existing in various states of reactivity, to be specific—goes on to discuss the two, supposedly, dominant views concerning the answer to this query. Firstly, he says “these molecular motions happened” because you wanted to go to the library owing to a desire about a belief that what you need is there; these desires in turn were caused by “psychological events and states”; these events and states, in turn, being the result of antecedent “causal agents”, as Kim calls them, that acted, worked, or brought about the resulting psychological events and psychological states, that situated the desire in you to go the library. Kim then cites American neurophysiologist Roger Sperry’s 1984 nearly inane explanation of scenario movement:

“The molecules of higher living things are moved around mostly by the living, vital powers (see: vitalism) of the particular species in which they’re embedded. They’re flown thought the air, galloped across the plains, swung through the jungle, propelled through the water, not by molecular forces or quantum mechanics but by the specific holistic vital and also mental properties—aims, wants, needs—possessed by the organisms in question.”

Kim states that this view is an example of what philosophers call “downward causation”—a 1974 coining of American psychologist Donald Campbell—a term that, strangely, seems to be at the core of the 2012 Juarrero-Deacon affair UC Berkeley investigation about research misconduct, accuser Cuban-born American action theory philosopher Alicia Juarrero arguing for downward causation; defender American qualia absenteeism philospher Terrence Deacon arguing against downward causation; both, however, ironically using a far-from-equilibrium bifurcation theory Prigogine thermodynamics platform to argue for nonreductive physical materialism. [1]

Anti-emergence position
American cognitive science philosopher Jerry Fodor, in 1998, described Kim’s challenge to the theory of emergence and to emergentists as follows: [4]

“Why is there anything except physics?”

In 2011, American neurological anthropologist Terrence Deacon, likewise, described Kim as the “most devastating critique of emergentism”, and rephrased Fodor’s truncation of Kim’s query, in semi-humorous terms, as follows: [3]

“It’s all just quarks and gluons.”

This last statement is pretty decent; but to clarify for Deacon, the correct statement, as modern hard science currently sees things is: “It’s all just fermions, bosons, and various states of existence of vacuum.”

Quotes | By
By the following are quotes by Kim:

“It is an ironic fact that the felt qualities of conscious experience, perhaps the only things that ultimately matter to us, are often relegated in the rest of philosophy to the status of ‘secondary qualities,’ in the shadowy zone between the real and the unreal, or even jettisoned outright as artifacts of confused minds.”
— Jaegwon Kim (2005), Physicalism: or Something Near Enough [6]

References
1. Jaegwon, Kim. (1992). “Downward Causation in Emergentism and Nonreductive Physicalism”, in: Emergence or Reduction?: Essays on the Prospects of Nonreductive Physicalism (pgs. 119-). Walter de Gruyter.
2. (a) Downward Causation – InformationPhilospher.com.
(b) Donald T. Campbell – Wikipedia.
3. Deacon, Terrence W. (2011). Incomplete Nature: How Mind Emerged from Matter (Kim, pgs. 164-55, 169). W.W. Norton & Co.
4. Fodor, Jerry. (1998). Concepts: Where Cognitive Science Went Wrong. Oxford University Press.
5. Thims, Libb. (2013). “Juarrero, Deacon, and Nonreductive Materialism” (review), Journal of Human Thermodynamics, 9(6):77-##, Month Day.
6. (a) Kim, Jaegwon. (2005). Physicalism, or Something Near Enough (pg. 12). Princeton University Press.
(b) Jaegwon Kim (Pablo’s Diary of Quotes) – Stafforini.com.
7. Annamalai, Kalyan, Puri, Ishwar K., and Jog, Milind A. (2011). Advanced Thermodynamics Engineering (§14: Thermodynamics and Biological Systems, pgs. 709-99, contributed by Kalyan Annamalai and Carlos Silva; §14.4.1: Human body | Formulae, pgs. 726-27; Thims, ref. 88). CRC Press.
8. Vale, R. D. & Milligan, R. A. (2000). “The Way Things Move: Looking Under the Hood of Molecular” (abs), Proteins Science, 288, 88-95.
9. Franklin, Stewart. (2010). “A Synthetic Small Molecule that Walks Down a Track”, Catenane.net.

External links
Jaegwon Kim – Wikipedia.
Jaegwon Kim (faculty) – Brown University.
Jaegwon Kim’s argument against non-reductivism (section) – Wikipedia.
Jaegwon Kim (quotes) – Cereoso.com.

TDics icon ns