... d and developed hat is philosophy Or, can be it unificated If an unification by reduction at one of the previous characterizations is inacceptable, still remain a posibility of unification not by reduction but by an ultimate persistent aim, ideal. I ill ilustrate this ith an example from philosophy of science. Popper considered that truth is the regulative ideal of science, and in this sense truth may have an unificatory role, relative to various special sciences, as a common aim, ideal, tack toard all the scientific propensities converge. But, truth single maybe is a too strong criterion of scientificity and is not enough as an ideal of science, because the common statements as the sun is brilliant are not veritable scientific statements, because they are too common-truths. More constrains are needed. In addition, science should to pursue also sistematic explanation, the las and the freedom grades of universe at all its levels, from microcosmos to individual human conscience, society and macrocosmos.Against antistructural reductionism Fetzer assume that science aims at the discovery of las of nature that have the form of general principles that are applicabile for the purposes of explanation and prediction. On the other hand, science should not to prefere simplicity and economy necessarly. Simpler theories ought to be prefered to complex alternatives only in the cases in ich they are also adequate, truth. I addition, e do not kno a priori that reality is simple. Other think that, science tend toards unitycf. Gold and Stoljar, 1999. Hoever, science should to pursue unity only in the case in ich orld is realy unitary. But, e do not kno a priori that universe have an ultimate universal unity. This aims are preferable but they are contingent aims, thereby they have a contingent scientific value. Maybe, the universe have a fundamental ontological level ich have a necessary existence, and consequently is universal, forin every posible orld, but the universe unity should not be identified ith the unity of science. The unity of universe exist at the fundamental ontological level, but the unity of human science is at the level of human conscious level. The human consciousness is something that exist at an upper ontological level, that depend on a more complex level of organization. If the elementary particles are not elementary, if there exist an ultimate unique-type-of-ontological-primitive, hoever, organization is a property ich cannot be reduced to the properties of its parts, for the behavior of each part depends on those of the others and on the aims of the hole.Del Re, 1998. By previous phrase I have not intentioned to defend the autonomy of chemistry, biology or of psychology against microphysicss imperialism. I only intended to criticize the tendency to reduce all the emergent properties of systems ith complex organization to the sums of the properties of their microparts. I disageed hith idea that all the phenomena from superior organizational complexity levels supervene as simple sums of the phenomena from loer levels. The superior cognitive capacities of human brain are absent at the single neuron level, that is neurons are not small brains. Brain is not a big neuron. For exemple, if e take to thousand of resistors and e try to connect them in all posibile structures, e kno that there is only one unnecessary structure, ich is total serial, in ich the total resistance, the phenomenon from higher level, is the sum of the resistance of each resistor, or the sum of the properties of phenomena from the loer level, but in structures that involve parallel conected resistors, the total resistance is not a simple sum of the resistance of individual resistors. The property that is comon both to the higher level and to the loer level is resistitivity.And, in the non-serial resistors corpus the difference in the total resistance is thanks to structure. Hoever, this resisto ... Download