Interactionism, Post-interactionism, and Causal Complexity: Lessons From the Philosophy of Causation

In biology and philosophy of biology, discussing the notion of interaction leads to an examination of interactionism, which is, broadly speaking, the view that rejects gene-centrism and gene determinism and instead emphasizes the fact that traits of organisms are always the result of genes and envir...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: María Ferreira Ruiz, Jon Umerez
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Frontiers Media S.A. 2021-03-01
Series:Frontiers in Psychology
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.590533/full
id doaj-603f5ba0a8d346d48b3858bcd227212a
record_format Article
spelling doaj-603f5ba0a8d346d48b3858bcd227212a2021-03-29T05:49:42ZengFrontiers Media S.A.Frontiers in Psychology1664-10782021-03-011210.3389/fpsyg.2021.590533590533Interactionism, Post-interactionism, and Causal Complexity: Lessons From the Philosophy of CausationMaría Ferreira Ruiz0Jon Umerez1Department of Philosophy, University of Bielefeld, Bielefeld, GermanyDepartment of Philosophy, University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU), Donostia/San Sebastián, SpainIn biology and philosophy of biology, discussing the notion of interaction leads to an examination of interactionism, which is, broadly speaking, the view that rejects gene-centrism and gene determinism and instead emphasizes the fact that traits of organisms are always the result of genes and environments. It has long been asserted that the nature-nurture problem requires an interactionist solution of sorts, the so-called interactionist consensus. This consensus, however, has been deemed insufficient and challenged by several authors triggering an extension of the debate among contestants and defenders. Unfortunately, part of the problem is that the views on causation that would ground claims about interactionism are not always made explicit in this debate, which renders those views somewhat complicated to assess. Moreover, it seems to be assumed that causal complexity excludes the possibility of characterizing, distinguishing, or comparing among causal contributions. By turning to a detailed survey of the origin of the debate and to some developments in the philosophy of causation, we will contend that this view is unwarranted, and that much of the debate around interactionism is based on the drawing of this (wrong) conclusion. We also examine implications of this analysis for the project to develop a framework based on the notion of inter-identities.https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.590533/fullinteractionismcausal paritycausal selectionnature-nurtureinter-identities
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author María Ferreira Ruiz
Jon Umerez
spellingShingle María Ferreira Ruiz
Jon Umerez
Interactionism, Post-interactionism, and Causal Complexity: Lessons From the Philosophy of Causation
Frontiers in Psychology
interactionism
causal parity
causal selection
nature-nurture
inter-identities
author_facet María Ferreira Ruiz
Jon Umerez
author_sort María Ferreira Ruiz
title Interactionism, Post-interactionism, and Causal Complexity: Lessons From the Philosophy of Causation
title_short Interactionism, Post-interactionism, and Causal Complexity: Lessons From the Philosophy of Causation
title_full Interactionism, Post-interactionism, and Causal Complexity: Lessons From the Philosophy of Causation
title_fullStr Interactionism, Post-interactionism, and Causal Complexity: Lessons From the Philosophy of Causation
title_full_unstemmed Interactionism, Post-interactionism, and Causal Complexity: Lessons From the Philosophy of Causation
title_sort interactionism, post-interactionism, and causal complexity: lessons from the philosophy of causation
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
series Frontiers in Psychology
issn 1664-1078
publishDate 2021-03-01
description In biology and philosophy of biology, discussing the notion of interaction leads to an examination of interactionism, which is, broadly speaking, the view that rejects gene-centrism and gene determinism and instead emphasizes the fact that traits of organisms are always the result of genes and environments. It has long been asserted that the nature-nurture problem requires an interactionist solution of sorts, the so-called interactionist consensus. This consensus, however, has been deemed insufficient and challenged by several authors triggering an extension of the debate among contestants and defenders. Unfortunately, part of the problem is that the views on causation that would ground claims about interactionism are not always made explicit in this debate, which renders those views somewhat complicated to assess. Moreover, it seems to be assumed that causal complexity excludes the possibility of characterizing, distinguishing, or comparing among causal contributions. By turning to a detailed survey of the origin of the debate and to some developments in the philosophy of causation, we will contend that this view is unwarranted, and that much of the debate around interactionism is based on the drawing of this (wrong) conclusion. We also examine implications of this analysis for the project to develop a framework based on the notion of inter-identities.
topic interactionism
causal parity
causal selection
nature-nurture
inter-identities
url https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.590533/full
work_keys_str_mv AT mariaferreiraruiz interactionismpostinteractionismandcausalcomplexitylessonsfromthephilosophyofcausation
AT jonumerez interactionismpostinteractionismandcausalcomplexitylessonsfromthephilosophyofcausation
_version_ 1724199067575123968