Bernard Lonergan identified the need and possibility of what he called "generalized empirical method" in science and philosophy. Implementation will be a future community achievement. The book enters into details of a selection of examples in the sciences and philosophy of science. These are provided not to engage in, or blend the present aim with traditional philosophical debate, but as points of entry to help reveal the possibility and need of balanced empirical method. Taking words of Lonergan: "(Q)uestions of method are practical. So my purpose in these (chapters) is not to demonstrate what is necessary. It is not to forecast what is probable. It is ... to invite you to share in the exploration of a proposal" (Bernard Lonergan, A Third Collection (1985), 114). The main examples are drawn from biochemistry and biology, although heuristics envisioned will include all sciences.

"Bernard Lonergan identified the need and possibility of what he called "generalized empirical method" in science and philosophy. Implementation will be a future community achievement. The book enters into details of a selection of examples in the sciences and philosophy of science. These are provided not to engage in, or blend the present aim with traditional philosophical debate, but as points of entry to help reveal the possibility and need of balanced empirical method. Taking words of Lonergan: "(Q)uestions of method are practical. So my purpose in these (chapters) is not to demonstrate what is necessary. It is not to forecast what is probable. It is ... to invite you to share in the exploration of a proposal" (Bernard Lonergan, A Third Collection (1985), 114). The main examples are drawn from biochemistry and biology, although heuristics envisioned will include all sciences."--Publisher's website.

Bernard Lonergan identified the need and possibility of what he called 'generalized empirical method' in science and philosophy. Implementation will be a future community achievement. The book enters into details of a selection of examples in the sciences and philosophy of science. These are provided not to engage in, or blend the present aim with traditional philosophical debate, but as points of entry to help reveal the possibility and need of balanced empirical method. Taking words of Lonergan: '(Q)uestions of method are practical. So my purpose in these (chapters) is not to demonstrate what is necessary. It is not to forecast what is probable. It is ... to invite you to share in the exploration of a proposal' (Bernard Lonergan, A Third Collection (1985), 114). The main examples are drawn from biochemistry and biology, although heuristics envisioned will include all sciences.

Randomness is an active element relevant to all scientific activities. The book explores the way in which randomness suffuses the human experience, starting with everyday chance events, followed by developments into modern probability theory, statistical mechanics, scientific data analysis, quantum mechanics, and quantum gravity. An accessible introduction to these theories is provided as a basis for going into deeper topics.Fowler unveils the influence of randomness in the two pillars of science, measurement and theory. Some emphasis is placed on the need and methods for optimal characterization of uncertainty. An example of the cost of neglecting this is the St. Petersburg Paradox, a theoretical game of chance with an infinite expected payoff value. The role of randomness in quantum mechanics reveals another particularly interesting finding: that in order for the physical universe to function as it does and permit conscious beings within it to enjoy sanity, irreducible randomness is necessary at the quantum level.The book employs a certain level of mathematics to describe physical reality in a more precise way that avoids the tendency of nonmathematical descriptions to be occasionally misleading. Thus, it is most readily digested by young students who have taken at least a class in introductory calculus, or professional scientists and engineers curious about the book's topics as a result of hearing about them in popular media. Readers not inclined to savor equations should be able to skip certain technical sections without losing the general flow of ideas. Still, it is hoped that even readers who usually avoid equations will give those within these pages a chance, as they may be surprised at how potentially foreboding concepts fall into line when one makes a legitimate attempt to follow a succession of mathematical implications.

In modern physics, various fundamental problems have become topics of ongoing debate. There was the 20th century climb to a Standard Model, still accurate at the highest energy levels obtainable so far. But, since the 1970's, a different approach to physics advocates for theories such as string theory, known for their mathematical elegance, even though they either cannot be verified in data or contradict presently known experimental results. In philosophy of physics, there is a gradually emerging consensus that philosophy of physics and physics somehow contribute to a common enterprise. But, there is little sign of progress toward consensus about the nature of that unity. All the while, it is generally recognized that physics is interdisciplinary. There are, of course, differences in focus. But, implicitly at least, there are no 'sharp dividing lines' between physics and philosophy of physics; pure and applied physics; physical chemistry; biophysics; medical physics; history and philosophy of physics; physics and society; physics education; and so on. What, then, is progress in physics? The question here is not about ideal structures, but asks about what is going on in physics. Beginnings in discerning the presence of eight main tasks help reveal the (pre-) emergence of a normative omni-disciplinary basis for collaboration that, once adverted to, promises to be constitutive of a new and increasingly effective control of meaning. Originally discovered by Bernard Lonergan in 1965, progress in the new collaboration will not seek to eliminate specialized expertise. It will, though, divide tasks within an eightfold functional division of labor. This book invites attention to data for each of the eight main tasks evident and self-evident in existing scholarship in the community. The book also makes preliminary efforts toward envisioning something of what functional collaboration will look like — in physics, the Academy and Society.

In Randomness, Statistics, and Emergence, McShane illustrates how classical and statistical procedures complement one another. One of the conclusions he draws in Randomness is that emergence and evolution are explained in terms of probabilities of emergence and probabilities of survival of recurrence-schemes. To arrive at a principle of emergence, McShane focuses on actual procedures of empirical investigators and the type of explanation they seek. Those doing the relevant sciences—biophysics and biochemistry are his focus in the last four chapters—can verify objective randomness and emergence by attending to their performance. McShane also makes beginnings in heuristics of biological and scientific growth and development. The first edition of this book was first published in 1970. The second edition includes a second preface, “The Riverrun to God,” written by McShane in the fall of 2012. It also includes an editor’s introduction written by Terrance Quinn, author of Invitation to Generalized Empirical Method in Philosophy and Science and The (Pre-) Dawning of Functional Specialization in Physics.

There is a growing interest in the character and the challenge of the Anthropocene. Although efforts to pin down beginning dates of this epoch have been debated, there is a broad consensus that humanity is facing an unprecedented challenge to surviving on Earth, a challenge which humans have created ourselves. Undeniably, we have had and continue to have impacts on the planet as a whole. These include ravaging bushfires and unprecedented flooding caused by climate change, spiking levels of carbon dioxide levels, and widespread loss of biodiversity. The challenge has been expressed in various ways: the larger challenges of climate change or ocean garbage toxicity, the subtler challenges that would support such large efforts by cultivating a new aesthetic. The present book asks of us to reach for the deeper grounding of all such efforts. Perhaps that asking is best hinted at by pluralizing the word character in a paradoxical non-question: “What is to be the 'character' of the characters transforming the Anthropocene from its present negativity to a positive period of human flourishing.” What is missing, what we are in the dark about, is the apparently simple turn that would have us asking, “What’s what?” The focus must be concrete: so we are to think of miners and farmers and reformers and economists and educators, but primarily of ourselves as whats. Might we begin the positive Anthropocene’s success by beginning to sow what comprehendingly?