Science research writer Tom Barlett’s 2012 blog article “Stolen Ideas? Or Great Minds Think Alike?” on the so-called Juarrero-Deacon theory plagiarism allegation, the allegation by Cuban-born American philosopher Alicia Juarrero that American neurological anthropologist Terrence Deacon stole her ontic opening dissipative structures emergence theory of intentional behavior. [1] |
Michael Lissack (13 Sep 2012): [15]
“Our position on this matter is very clear: Terry Deacon is a serial plagiarist and UC Berkeley has no interest in dealing with that ugly truth.”
Terrence Deacon: (29 Feb 2012): [16]
“Hi all (and especially Marianna), I have been directed to your blog by a colleague who noticed the comments about my book and Juarrero’s spreadsheet. This is a nasty business in which Juarrero is spreading false claims suggesting that I have used her ideas without attribution. I have not. I urge you to read both books [17,18], and you will see this for yourself. Although there are indeed superficial similarities, as inevitably occurs in an area of such intense intellectual discussion, these are ultimately quite superficial. I have only recently come to read her book [17] and her one paper [13] on Kant in response to her tirade [19] about not being cited, and it is now clear that I disagree with her approach in far more ways than we agree. This is not just because she is a philosopher and I am a lab scientist by training. I think that we are fundamentally driving at very different ways of explaining almost every aspect covered in my book: life, mind, sentience [feeling/sense], consciousness, information, work, and so forth, even though we both borrow insights from dynamical systems theories and share a criticism of simple eliminative materialism. Nevertheless, once you overcome the accusatory hype of her spreadsheet [3] and actually do compare these two approaches the differences can be quite informative and worth debating. To those of you struggling through the book [18]. I hope that you find the ideas worth the time and teleodynamic work. I can’t promise to be able to keep up with your blog or to have any idea of what OOP is about but I am honored to have initiated some interesting discussions.”
The opening section of the formal exoneration, by the official investigation of the University of California, Berkeley, of the plagiarism allegations of Deacon made by Juarrero. [28] |
“After a formal investigation, the University has determined that there is no merit to allegations that you violated the University’s Research Misconduct Policy and Faculty Code of Conduct by committing plagiarism or misappropriating the ideas of others.”
“There is no excuse, to even tolerate the idea that in the Internet Age it is acceptable … to fail to see what others have written before publishing his own work. Plagiarism by negligence is still plagiarism.”
A
+B
[?]
→C Alicia Juarrero (1999) [17] Evan Thompson (2007) Terrence Deacon (2011) [18]
“There is in fact hardly an original idea in [Deacon’s] book. Two works, in particular, stand out in the prior literature: Dynamics in Action by Alicia Juarrero and Mind and Life Mind and Life by Evan Thompson. Neither book is cited by Deacon, although they cover much the same ground as his—far more lucidly and insightfully.”
Theorist Date Theories Democritus c.410BC accidentality mechanism theory (atomic theory) Epicurus c.300BC accidentality mechanism theory (atomic theory) Gottfried Leibniz c.1714 mechanistic vera causa theory; hylozoism (panbioism); monad theory (internal force) David Hume 1740 pre-Kantian ideas Johann Blumenbach 1781 "bildungstrieb" (formational drive) Immanuel Kant 1781 teleology and self-organization; living matter as inconceivable (origin of life); external force/internal force theory; hylozoism (panbioism) Ilya Prigogine 1967 dissipative structures; order through fluctuations Ludwig Bertalanffy 1968 general systems theory Humberto Maturana 1973 autopoiesis Mario Bunge 1979 emergent properties; holism Milan Zeleny 1980 autopoiesis; holism; origin of life (first autopoietic system) Erich Jantsch 1980 self-organization; autocatalysis; allopoietic systems; autopoietic systems; consciousness Joseph Earley 1981 autocatalyticity
Keynote speakers, Terrence Deacon, second from left, and Alicia Juarrero, right, at the STARS conference lectures in Cancun in January 2007, one of the points of contact between the two; they both presumably listed to each other’s lectures; Juarrero specifically states that Deacon was in the audience during her lecture. |
“The "facts" listed [above] aren't in fact true. Lissack did NOT provide me with a copy of Juarrero's work (there are many witnesses to this). I presented the core theory from Incomplete Nature at the conference that was also attended by Juarrero (and my slides were made public by the organizers). I do not believe in top-down causality. I criticize the dynamical systems approach. I develop a fundamentally re-worked understanding of information that is not Shannonian. I am not an anti-reductionist. I find phenomenology vacuous. And I explicitly demonstrate why self-organization is insufficient for an account of life much less mind.”
“I need to emphasize that Deacon's theses—and the arguments he presents to back up those theses—track mine practically from beginning to end (without my emphasis on action theory, and certainly without his neologisms!). We're not just talking of a few selected passages here and there that are similar. My central ideas and argumentation permeate Deacon's book from beginning to end, as the spreadsheet shows. Here are the two books' main theses:
1. Newtonian mechanical (efficient) causality cannot account for end-directedness and goal-directedness (teleology, purposiveness) –or agency, intentionality (consciousness, sentience). So attempts to reduce the latter to the former won't work.
2. Aristotelian formal and final causes used to serve this purpose but not an option since the enlightenment/scientific revolution—Kant knew that, however, and associated teleology with intrinsic finality/self-organization. Prigogine's discovery of dissipative structures provides a scientific respectable understanding of teleology as self-organization. I published this material in 1985.
3. Best to reconceptualize causality in other terms
4. Consider information theory and entropy in thermodynamics can help—especially Prigogine/self-organization/far from equilibrium thermodynamics (complex systems), and self-organization, especially autocatalysis. Autocatalysis embodies formal cause and constitutes a proto-self through the implementation of intrinsic constraints. Far from equilibrium thermodynamics do not violate the first law.
5. Part-whole and whole-part context-sensitive/dependent constraints (redundancy) can account for mereological causality (bottom up constraints are enabling, expand degrees of freedom); top-down second/higher order constraints—from whole to part—are restrictive)—differences between physical, chemical and biological constraint production and operation do not obviate the similarities and both can account for "whole to part causality"—these in turn embody formal and final causes without reduction or remainder.
6. The workings of constraint in both cases are changes in probability/frequency distribution—this dissolves the Maxwell demon problem by making the demon an internal. Second law of thermodynamics is thereby upheld too.
7. [Points] 5 and 6 above are best understood as ontogenetic and phylogenetically constructed dynamical attractors and can be pictured topologically. Doing so dissolves the semantics/syntax (meaning-grammar) problem—answers Searle's Chinese room objection.
8. The self, free will, and individuality are best reconceptualized and understood as the operations of complex dynamical constraints.
9. Dynamical constraint operation is irreducible to matter/energy considerations. There is decoupling between levels due to multiple realizability feature of higher level constraints. Hence emergence is ontological.
10. Agency and intentional causation are the exercise of whole-part dynamical constraints
11. Biological constraints are semiotic; interpretive since there is no sentence by sentence or paragraph by paragraph identities, in order to make a determination that my main claims and arguments have been appropriated there is no other way than to read both books carefully and in their entirety—using the spreadsheet's identification of specific page references in both books for assistance.
Deacon's August 2007 chapter "The Physical Origins of Purposive Systems", co-authored with Jeremy Sherman, that Cuban-born American philosopher Alicia Juarrero claims, via legal action, he misapproprated from her lecture in Cancun seven months prior. [9] |
Cuban-born American philosopher Alicia Juarrero's 2012 "Is it Plagiarism?" poll (left) with vote count as of 17 Dec 2012, which show that 81% of voters (at her cite) think she is either paranoid or that the similarity is a repercussion of the fact that they work in the same field. [7] |
Two similar photon mill diagrams: Polish-born Canadian physicist Marek Roland's 1992 version and Americans ecologist Eric Schneider's 2005 version, the latter of which Roland claims Schneider copied without permission or citation, whereas correctly the hot/cold photon mill concepts predates both of them, particularly in the 1988 work of German physical evolutionists Werner Ebeling, Rainer Feistel, and Andreas Engel. [21] |
“It seems that in the book Into the Cool: Energy Flow, Thermodynamics, and Life ideas and drawings from my 1992 paper "Life on Earth: Flow of Energy and Entropy" are used without my permission or due credit.”
“’Hot’ and ‘Cold’ photons concepts were explained in my paper 1992 paper "Life on Earth: Flow of Energy and Entropy". None of the authors above got my permission to use it or to re-work my diagram.”