Lector dr. Gabriel Vacariu
I have not been doing either “contemporary philosophy” or science. With my EDWs perspective, we can now return to – using Michael Friedman’s expression (2001) – the “long forgotten image of philosophy that once guided science” . Anyway, EDWs are not for today, the place of the remnants of the last century, but for tomorrow, the time of new contretemps!
Contact: gvacariu [at] yahoo.com
- The “BOOK OF BOOKS” (published in Romanian, published already in November 2014 in Romanian): Gabriel Vacariu (2014) Epistemologically different worlds – The new paradigm of thinking, Datagroup int srl. This book is a relative short version of my EDWs perspective and its main applications to the main philosophical and scientific areas: philosophy of mind, cognitive (neuro)science, biology and physics (quantum mechanics, Einstein’s theory of relativity). It will be also published in English and German languages (printed and ePub). (See the Content here)
On the second cover of this book, some words about this book from William Bechtel (USA), John Bickle (USA), Eliezer Torres (Mexico), Rom Harre (Great Britain and USA), Ilie Parvu (Romania), Mohsen Aghaei (Iran), and Philip Cam (Australia) (copertile in limba romana)
- My book “Epistemologically different worlds” (2008) have been mentioned on Wikipedia.org webpage: “Counterfactual definiteness” (Categories: “Quantum measurement”) at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counterfactual_definiteness (the same article at http://encyclopine.org/en/Counterfactual_definiteness; www.minds.com/; www.mashpedia.com; www.redorblue.tk/; enc.tfode.com/; nichecreator.com/; epo.wikitrans.net/; 4cc.ir/docs/; www.tutorgigpedia.com; sciencewise.info/; www.biblicalwritings.com; si.infogin.com/, etc.). The first paragraph of this article indicates:
“Counterfactual definiteness (CFD) means that the output of a system can, in principle, be calculated by using an explicit formula y = f(x). Although the aspects of the universe that can adequately be described by classical physics are compatible with counterfactual definiteness, those aspects of the universe that can only be adequately modelled or described by quantum mechanics are not in all cases compatible with counterfactual definiteness. ” (Footnote : “Gabriel Vacariu, “Epistemologically Different Worlds,” Editura Universitãtii din bucuresti, 2008, ISBN 978-973-737-442-4 p. 331″)
- On 15.10.2014: On 15.10.2014, Radu Ionicioiu (Department of Physics, UB) had a presentation at Department of Philosophy, UB about Ionicioiu and Terno’s article on quantum mechanics from 2011. After his presentation, I asked him a few questions. About Ionicioiu and Terno’s thought experiment, my questions at his presentation and my “epistemologically different worlds” perspective from 2005, 2006, 2008, 2010 on quantum mechanics, see 2014-About-Ionicioius-thought-experiment-on-quantum-mechanics-2011-and-my-EDWs-perspective-2008 The main idea from Ionicioiu and Terno’s paper (2011) is very similar to my idea from my book 2008 that I posted on Internet in 2008 (this idea appeared also in my paper from 2005). In my book from 2008 (last chapter) or my book from 2010, my PhD thesis from 2007 or papers from 2006 or 2005, I showed the wave and the particles or the planets and the microparticles are in EDWs. The wave does not exist for the particles, the planet does not exist for microparticles, therefore, to check for their relationships is meaningless! Therefore, quantum mechanics is a pseudo-theory since the “world” does not exist but only EDWs exist.
- About my participation Frankfurt Book Fair October 2014 and the discussion that I had with the Director of section “Psychology/Cognitive science” from Springer Publishing Company about my book, About my participation to Frankfurt Book Fair 2014
- Because all my courses/seminars are in the first semester, in the second semester (from January to September 2015), I have no courses/seminars at my department (University of Bucharest). Any university can invite me to hold courses/seminars in this period. I can hold courses/seminars on Philosophy of Cognitive Science, Philosophy of Cognitive Neuroscience, Philosophy of mind, Theories of Scientific Knowledge (philosophy of Einstein’s theory of relativity, quantum mechanics, the relationship between these two theories, multiverse, etc.), and Philosophy of Science. (See my books online below for the topics of these courses)
- (2014) “More troubles with cognitive neuroscience. Einstein’s theory of relativity and the hyperverse”(125,000 words) (my book published in May 2014, Full text PDF)
In this book (2014), I points out more troubles of cognitive neuroscience: spatial cognition, the best achievements in cognitive neuroscience in the last 3 years (the fMRI experiments of Gallant’s team), multisensory integration, endogenous brain activity, default network, and the relationship between micro-neuronal level, macro-neuronal level, oscillations and cognition. In the book (2012) “Cognitive neuroscience versus epistemologically different worlds”, I investigated some important problems of cognitive neuroscience. The general conclusion of these two works (2012 and 2014) is that cognitive neuroscience is a pseudo-science. In the last chapter of this book (2014), with my EDWs perspective, I furnish the (hyper)ontological status of Einstein’s (special and general) theory of relativity. Appendix: “Did Markus Gabriel (Bonn University) plagiarize my ideas?”)
- “Did Markus Gabriel plagiarize my ideas?” (Gabriel Vacariu, Philosophy, University of Bucharest)(.pdf) About the same topic, see also Youtube clip In this clip, Gabriel Vacariu (Philosophy, Bucharest University) analyzes the UNBELIEVABLE similarities between the ideas from his works (2005, 2008, 2010, 2011, 2012) and Markus Gabriel’s ideas (Bonn University) from his book published in 2013 and his TED clip (at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hzvesGB_TI0), also 2013.
- Other UNBELIEVABLE similarities between my ideas (2005, 2008, 20010, 2011, 2012) and Markus Gabriel’s ideas (published by him in a journal in ROMANIA in 2014! Markus Gabriel (2014) (Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität Bonn), “Is Heidegger’s “Turn” a Realist Project?” in Meta: Research in hermeneutics, phenomenology, and practical philosophy, special issue / 2014: 44-73, www.metajournal.org (Chief editors are three philosophers from Faculty of Philosophy, University of AI Cuza, Iassy (one of my ex-colleague – I was student my first 3 years at this department – and he recognized he knew about the scandal with Markus Gabriel’s plagiarism with his book and TED clip (2013)! Three authors from that special issues comments Markus Gabriel’s “new realism” (his book 2013)! ( More details, here ) During 2500 years people have worked within the wrong framework (the world/universe); therefore it is impossible two persons to published a new framework within the same decade!!! This sentence is also available for the very similar ideas published by other authors below…
Other authors who published, after 2010, surprising similar ideas to my ideas from 2005 and 2008:
- Many ideas from Georg Nortoff’s works (published one paper in 2010, mainly his book in 2011, other papers in 2012, 2103, 2014, especially those related to Kant’s philosophy and the notion of the “observer”, the mind-brain problem, default mode network, the self, the mental states and their “correspondence” to the brain) are surprisingly very similar to my ideas published in my article from 2002, 2005 and my book from 2008. In two papers from 2002 (also my paper from 2005 and my book 2008), following Kant’s philosophy, I introduced the notion of the “observer” for the mind-brain problem. After 2010 (mainly his book 2011 and other papers after this book), Nortoff also uses Kant’s philosophy (even if his knowledge about Kant’s philosophy is very superficial!) and the notion of the “observer” for the mind-brain problem in a methodology very similar to my methodology. Moreover, instead of EDWs, Nortoff uses a kind of “transdisciplinary” view, quite close to parallelism – the closest approach to my EDWs! However, in his works until 2014, Northoff’s conclusion within the unicorn world was different than my conclusion. (For more details, click Northoff’s ideas) However, in his book 2014 (two volumes) using notions like “correlations” and even “correspondences” many times, his conclusion is very closed to my EDWs! This dramatic change of framework in 3 years is quite unbelievable!!!
- Christoff Kalina, Diego Cosmelli, Legrand Dorothée and Thompson Evan (2011), “Specifying the self for cognitive neuroscience”, Trends in Cognitive Sciences 15/3, 104-112 (The ideas related to role of the self in cognitive neuroscience, sensorymotor activities, default network) (For more details, click Christoff Kalina et al. 2011)
- Few words about quantum mechanics regarding the work of Ioniciou and Terno (2011) (more details on these pages from Vacariu 2014, pp. 309-3013: Few words about quantum mechanics from Vacariu (2014).pdf) On 15.10.2014, Radu Ionicioiu (Department of Physics, UB) had a presentation at Department of Philosophy, UB about Ionicioiu and Terno’s article on quantum mechanics from 2011. After his presentation, I asked him a few questions. About these questions and my “epistemologically different worlds” perspective from 2005, 2006, 2008, 2010 on quantum mechanics (2014): see 2014-About-Ionicioius-thought-experiment-on-quantum-mechanics-2011-and-my-EDWs-perspective-2008
- I posted on the Internet, at my webpage, my papers and books just few months after being published. My books/papers can be found on many Internet sites and have been downloaded by many people. These authors published their ideas (surprisingly very similar to my ideas) at least 5 years after I published my ideas in my article from 2005 and 3-4 years after I published (and immediately posted) my book published in 2008! In our days, because of Internet, time is very compressed: in a very short time, various people have already plagiarized many of my ideas.
- Not too many people have quoted my works yet. Why? Because (1) Some of them prefer to plagiarize my ideas (I have been the most plagiarized author in the history of human thinking just because I changed completely the paradigm of thinking about the world and the self but I am Romanian) (2) Some of them (who elaborated some approaches/ideas) reject instantly my ideas since my EDWs erase all other approaches, their works vanish completely (3) The majority of people do not understand (or do not read) my ideas.
- However, “the distance between the pioneers and the much smaller followers becomes so great that the latter cannot reach the former; the age of servile imitation begins – yet not of nature, but of the style of the great masters, zealous copyists remove the labels from the elixirs of the Magi and put them on their vials.” (Arnold Gehlen, Images of time)
- (04.12.2013) Presentation “The world vs. epistemologically different worlds”, Department of Philosophy, Bucharest University. See this presentation on Youtube: Part 1 and Part 2.In this clip, I present my Epistemologically Different Worlds (EDWs) perspective. In other works (2005, 2008, 2011, 2012), I tried to illustrate that the greatest illusion of human knowledge surviving from the oldest times is the notion of „world”, of „uni-verse” or as he called it, the „unicorn world”. The main mistake that led to the creation of the unicorn world is that we, the human beings, believed (consciously or not) that we were the only observers of the “world”. As a result, Gods, all beings (humans with their mind, brains and bodies, and plants, cells, microbes, animals) and all objects (tables, stones and planets, electrons, waves and fields) have been placed within the same world, the unique world, the uni-verse. I replace the “world” with EDWs. The tables (and all macro-objects) belong to the same EW (macro-EW), the electrons and protons belong to micro-EW, while the mind is an EW, the brain and the body or the wave and the microparticle, organism and life belong to (or are) EDWs. All great philosophical problems (mind-brain problem) and all quantum problems (entanglement, non-locality, etc.) are pseudo-problems. (For all these pseudo-problems, see my other works at this page) See also this pdf text.
Work in progress
In my previous books (“Cognitive neuroscience vs. epistemologically different worlds”, 2012 and “More troubles in cognitive neuroscience. Einstein theory of relativity and the hyperverse”, 2014) I showed that cognitive neuroscience is a pseudo-science. In the last months, I have worked on the application of my theory to Einstein’s theory of relativity. Therefore, in the appendix of the last book (2014), I furnished the hyperontological foundation of the special and the general theory of relativity. In my five books, applying the EDWs perspective to the problems from various special sciences (cognitive (neuro)science, physics, and biology), I argued that many major (and eternal) philosophical (including great scientific) problems are pseudo-problems constructed within the unicorn world, the “world” that does not even exist.
Many problems from cognitive neuroscience cannot be solved if we do not have a clear definition of the “I”, self. However, the “I” (subjectivity, self, the implicit (not only the explicit) knowledge) is unexplained yet. For disentangling this unique problem, the “I”, the self, I will elaborated a new framework with the following steps: (1) The “epistemologically different worlds” perspective (2) The knowledge from my books (especially the last two books about cognitive neuroscience) (3) Kant’s view about self within my EDWs framework (4) Some approaches about the “I” elaborated by different authors (Gallangher, Zahavi, Metzinger, Hauskeller, Legrand, Damasio, etc.) investigated within the EDWs view. The “I”/the self, self-consciousness, self-representation, first-person perspective (related to spatial cognition), the “correlations” between self and the brain, etc. will be investigated within my framework, the EDWs perspective.
Editor of issues
(2013) Gabriel Vacaru and Mihai Vacariu (eds.), “The mind-body problem in cognitive neuroscience”, Philosophia Scientiae 17/2 (Nancy-Universite/France). Authors of this issue: William Bechtel, Rolls T. Edmund, Cees van Leeuwen, Kari Theurer and John Bickle, Bernard Andrieu, Corey Maley and Gualtiero Piccinini, Paula Droege, and Gabriel Vacariu and Mihai Vacariu. Abstracts of all articles (pdf)
(2001) M. Vacariu, E. T. Rolls, G. Vacariu, (eds), “Representations”, Synthese 129/2 (Kluwer, Boston) (ISI) Authors of this issue: Edmund T. Rolls (Oxford University); Kim Plunkett (Oxford University); Peter Mcleod (Oxford University), David Plaut and Tim Shallice; K. Rantala (University of Tampere); Michael Wheeler (Oxford University); Radu Bogdan (Tulaine University); Ilie Parvu (Bucharest University); Gabriel Vacariu, Dalia Terhesiu and Mihai Vacariu (http://www.springerlink.com/content/w4k0qhywlvv4/?p=a343fc99dadd48209134de
|(2013) Philosophia Scientiae 17/2 (France)
(cover and content PDF)
|(2001) Synthese 129/2 (USA, Springer)
(covers and content PDF)
In this book, I points out more troubles with cognitive neuroscience: spatial cognition, the best achievements in cognitive neuroscience in the last 3 years (the fMRI experiments of Gallant’s team), multisensory integration, endogenous brain activity, default network, and the relationship between micro-neuronal level, macro-neuronal level, oscillations and cognition. In the book “Cognitive neuroscience versus epistemologically different worlds” (2012), I investigated some important problems of cognitive neuroscience. (see below) The general conclusion of these two works is that cognitive neuroscience is a pseudo-science. In the last chapter of this book (2014), with my EDWs perspective, I furnish the (hyper)ontological status of Einstein’s (special and general) theory of relativity. (Appendix: “Did Markus Gabriel (Bonn University) plagiarize my ideas?”)
● (2012) “Cognitive neuroscience versus epistemologically different worlds”, University of Bucharest Press, 356 pages, 120,000 words. (full text PDF)
From the “epistemologically different worlds” perspective, I analyze the status of cognitive neuroscience today. I investigate the main actual topics in cognitive neuroscience: localization and the brain imaging, the binding problem (Treisman’s feature integration theory and synchronized oscillations approach), differentation and integration, optimism versus skepticism approaches, perception and object recognition, space and the mind, crossmodal interactions, and the holistic view against localization. The conclusion is that this “science” has “No ontology landscape” and, therefore, cognitive neuroscience is a pseudo-science.
● (2011) “Being and the Hypervese” (In English), University of Bucharest Press, 50,000 words. Full text (PDF) and Abstract (DOCX)
It is about the pure theoretical system of EDWs (almost without applications to any particular sciences – cognitive science, physics or biology). I constructedthe conditions of the possibility for any EDWs (that exist or possible to exist) given by 13 propositions that represent the axiomatic-hyperontological framework in 13 parts. In general, these propositions refer to the abstract entities andtheir interactions. Being is the only entity that is an epistemological world. In this short book, I deal with the hyperontology of the hyperverse, no more or less than “pure philosophy”.
● (2010) Vacariu, Gabriel and Vacariu, Mihai: “Mind, Life and Matter in the Hyperverse”, (PDF, published version, in English), University of Bucharest Press, 95,000 words.
Hyperverse (epistemologically different worlds) vs. “unicorn world” and the application of the EDWs perspective to: neuroscience (Llinas) and cognitive neuroscience (Frith), robotics (Andy Clark and Noe), Descartes’ ghost (Grush and Michael Wheleer), Bechtel’s mechanisms, Bickle’s molecules and cells, Kauffman’s “complexity” in biology, physics (particles and waves, gravity and Einstein, quantum mechanics, the superstring theory or hyperspace vs. the hyperverse).
● (2008) Epistemologically Different Worlds,(published version, PDF, in English) University of Bucharest Press,
Descartes, Kant, “epistemologically different worlds” perspective and its applications to: (1) philosophy of mind (levels, reductionism, emergence, qualia, the “I”, mental causation, supervenience); (2) cognitive science (computationalism, connectionism, dynamical system approach, robotics, representation, levels, declarative-procedural, accessible-inaccessible, conscious-unconscious, conceptual-sensorimotor, symbolic-subsymbolic, and explicit-implicit knowledge, thresholds, self-organization, etc.) (3) philosophy (logical positivism, Carnap’s linguistic frameworks, Quine, Goodman, Putnam, Friedman) (4) physics (quantum mechanics: superposition, entanglement, nonlocality and nonseparability, levels, collapse, measurement problem, Young’s experiment and Wheelers’ delayed-choice experiment, Feynman’s “sum over histories” framework, Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle, Schrödinger’s cat, decoherence and the multiverse approach)
● (2013) Gabriel Vacariu si Gheorghe Ştefanov (editori), Problema minte-creier în neuroştiinţa cogniţiei, Editura Universităţii din Bucureşti (Cuprins si coperta)
Articles published 13 ISI/ERIH (10 ISI, 3 ERIH)
● (June 2013) Gabriel Vacariu and Mihai Vacariu, “Introduction”, special issue “The mind-brain problem in cognitive neuroscience”, Philosophia Scientiae 17/2 (France)(ERIH)
● (2013) Gabriel Vacariu and Mihai Vacariu “Troubles with cognitive neuroscience“, Philosophia Scientiae 17/2 (France)(ERIH)
“Abstract: In few words, we present the main actual problems of cognitive neuroscience: the binding problem, localization, differentiation-integration in the brain, the troubles created by the brain imaging, and optimism vs. skepticism in cognitive neuroscience. Surprisingly, even if there are more and more experimental results in recent years, we notice no real hope for solving these troubles in the future. Cognitive neuroscience is a science constructed on ‘correlations’ between mental and neuronal states, mainly furnished by the brain imaging – fMRI of the last two decades. We want to suggest that “correlation” lacks any ontological background. In this context, we have to answer the following question: Is cognitive neuroscience a real science or a kind of ‘new engineering’?”
● (2012), “Localization in cognitive neuroscience: optimism (Bechtel) versus skepticism (Uttal)“, Analele Universitatii din Craiova, Filosofie (pdf)(ERIH)
● (2011) “The synchrony or temporal coding theory (temporal binding)“, Mihai Vacariu and Gabriel Vacariu, Analele Universitatii Bucuresti(pdf)
● (August 2011), “The mind-brain problem today”, Open Journal of Philosophy, (Scientific Research Publishing, US)
● (2010) “Emulators, representations and Descartes’ ghost” (PDF) Mihai Vacariu si Gabriel Vacariu, Analele Universitatii Bucuresti
● (2009) Gabriel Vacariu and Mihai Vacariu. “Physics and Epistemologically Different Worlds” (PDF), Revue roumaine de philosophie, vol. 53, 2009, nr. 1-2. (ISI)
● (2009) Gabriel Vacariu, Mihai Vacariu, Leon Zăgrean, “Neurostiinta cognitiei si problema minte-creier” in Eugen Avram(coord.), Creier, Functionalitate, dizabilitate, Editura Universitatii Bucuresti
(in English: “Cognitive Neuroscience and the mind-brain problem”, in Eugen Avram (ed.) Brain, Functionality, Disability, University of Bucharest Press)
● (2008) Gabriel Vacariu and Mihai Vacariu.”The “I” as an epistemological world” (PDF), Analele Universitatii Bucuresti
● (2007) “Kant, philosophy in the last 100 years and an epistemologically different worlds perspective”(PDF), Revue Roumanie de Philosophie, vol. 51 (ISI)
● (2007) “Perceptual mental states, higher order thoughts, and consciousness“ (PDF), Analele Universitatii Bucuresti
● (2006) “The epistemologically different worlds perspective and some pseudo-notions from quantum mechanics”, Analele Universitatii Bucuresti
● (2005) “Mind, brain and epistemologically different worlds”, in Synthese Review, vol. 143, no. 3 (http://www.springerlink.com/content/m152587261h1/) (ISI)
● (2004) “Brain, mind and epistemologically different worlds” (PDF), in Revue Roumanie de Philosophie, 48, no.1-2 (ISI)
● (2002) “Reprezentari si concepte”(“Representations and concepts”) (PDF) in Romanian Academy Journal of Philosophy, no. 3-4, an international issue on Cognitive Science (ISI)
● (2002) Terhesiu D., and Vacariu G. “Brain, mind and the perspective of the observer”(PDF), Revue Roumanie de Philosophie, 46, no.1-2 (ISI)
● (2002) Vacariu, G. and Terhesiu, D. “Brain, mind and the role of the observer”, in Philosophy of Consciousness and Cognitive Science, Angela Botez and Bogdan Popescu (Eds.), Bucharest, Cartea Romaneasca
● (2002) G. Vacariu, M. Vacariu, “In searching for the Absolute”(DOC), series of 3 essays about the aesthetics of Andrei Tarkovsky’s in Timpul (The Time), starting with no.7, July 2002, Iassy, Romania.
● (2001) M. Vacariu, G. Vacariu, E. T. Rolls (Eds), “Representations in the Mind, Representations in the Brain”- introduction to vol. 129, no. 2, Synthese, November 2001, (Kluwer, Boston) (ISI)
930e961bf7π=74 ) Authors of the articles are: E.T. Rolls (Oxford University), Kim Plunkett (Oxford University), Peter Mcleod (Oxford University)& Shallice & Plaut, K. Rantala (University of Tampere), M. Wheeler, Radu Bogdan (Tulaine University), Ilie Parvu (Bucharest University), G. Vacariu & D. Terhesiu & M. Vacariu
● (2001) G. Vacariu, D. Terhesiu, M. Vacariu, “Towards a very idea of representation” in Synthese, vol. 219, no.2, November 2001, Kluwer, Boston (http://www.springerlink.com/content/w4k0qhywlvv4/?p=a343fc99dadd48209134de
930e961bf7π=74 ) (ISI)
● (1999) I. Toader and G. Vacariu, “Inquieries on Carnap’s Aufbau (II)”(PDF), Revue Roumaine de Philosophie, no. 42-43, Romanian Academy (ISI)
● (1998) G. Vacariu I. and Toader: “Color similarity in Carnap’s Aufbau ”(PDF), Krisis, vol. 6
● (1997) I. Toader and G. Vacariu, “Inquieries on Carnap’s Aufbau (I)”(PDF), Revue Roumaine de Philosophie, no. 3-4, Romanian Academy (ISI)
(Except 5 and 10, all my articles are published in English.)
My articles are mentioned by different authors in some articles, books or PhD thesis:
● About the “epistemologically different worlds” at http://worddomination.com/epistemologically.html
● My EDWs perspective is investigated by Ahmed Kuytov (Veliko Tarnovo, Bulgaria, an article in a Bulgarian journal (2014), pp. 55-60) at http://issuu.com/24756/docs/idei_1-2014/73?e=3480348/7323418 (or here)
● Despre munca mea si neamtul care mi-a plagiat ideile, vezi http://reactii.ro/de-ce-lumea-nu-exista-despre-moartea-inorogului-si-invierea-filozofiei/ (in limba romana)
The article Vacariu, Terhesiu, Vacariu (2001)
● Wheeler, Michael, 2005, Reconstructing the Cognitive World – The Next Step, Bradford Book, The MIT Press
● Wheeler, Michael, 2009, “The Problem of Representation”, in Shaun Gallager and Daniel Schmicking (eds.), Handbook of Phenomenology and Cognitive Science, Springer
● Scott Freeman (2012), “An engaging nuisance: Weka, flipping and farmers”, PhD thesis Philosophy, Lincoln University, New Zeeland
● Michael Anacker, Marc Breuer, Daniel Cohnitz, Michael Flacke (2003), “Bibliography Zeitschriftenschau”, Journal for General Philosophy of Science 34: 371–405
● Szabó, Inácio (2008), “Comunidades virtuais de conhecimento: informação e inteligência coletiva no ciberespaço”, Universidade Federal da Bahia, Instituto de Ciência da Informação, Programa de Pós-graduação em Ciência da Informação
The article Vacariu (2005)
● van der Beek, George (2006), “Representationalism versus Anti-representationalism: constraining the notion of representation”, Master’s thesis at Cognitive Artiﬁcial Intelligence, University of Utrecht
● Tsai, Yao-Ming (Associate Professor, Department of Philosophy, National Taiwan University), “The Philosophical Outreach and Literary Review of the Mind-Body Topic in Buddhist Studies”
● Lovell-Smith, Hugh David (2009), “A consideration of homeostatic regulation of eating from the perspective of maharishi vedic science”, PhD thesis, University of Auckland, NZ
● Bosnic, Emir (2009), “Física cartesiana e mathesis universalis”, Rio de Janeiro, Brasil, PhD thesis, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Brasil
● Inácio Szabó and Rubens Ribeiro Gonçalves da Silva, (2006) “A construção de conhecimento nas comunidades virtuais do ciberespaço”, Revista da Associação Nacional dos Programas de Pós-Graduação em Comunicação, Spain
● Cai Yaoming (2010) (National Taiwan University Department of Philosophy) “The psychosomatic topic philosophy in Buddhist scholars the tentacles and academic review”, La Well the network editorial department reported
● John Bickle “Introduction”, Synthese (2005). Volume 147, Issue 3
Article (2007) “Kant, philosophy in the last 100 years and an epistemologically different worlds perspective”
● Margit Ruffing (2009), “Kant-Bibliographie 2007”, Kant-Studien issue 4, pp. 427-592
About “Epistemologically different worlds” (2008)
● Adriana Monica Solomon (2009), Revista de Filosofie Analitică, Volumul III, 10, Ianuarie (http://www.srfa.ro/rrfa/pdf/rfa-III-1-publicatii-evenimente.pdf)
● Wikipedia.org: “Counterfactual definiteness” (Categories: “Quantum measurement”) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counterfactual_definiteness
The article Vacariu (2011)
● Sung Jang Chung (2014), “Parallels between Confucian Philosophy and Quantum Physics”, Open Journal of Philosophy 4, 192-206
● Sung Jang Chung (Morristown-Hamblen Healthcare System, Morristown, USA) (2012), “The Science of Self, Mind and Body”, Open Journal of Philosophy (USA), Vol.2, No.3
● (January 2008) Ph.D. degree, University of New South Wales, School of Philosophy (Sydney, Australia)
● (2004- 2007) Ph.D. student, University of New South Wales, School of Philosophy (Sydney, Australia); Title: Epistemologically Different Worlds (PDF); EIPRS and UIPA scholarships. The thesis was submitted at Graduate Centre, UNSW on 06.09.2007 and posted on the internet on 21.09.2007 and then on 29.04.2008. The referees of the thesis: John Bickle (University of Cincinnati, USA), Rom Harre (Linacre College, Oxford, UK) and Ilie Parvu (University of Bucharest, Romania)
● (February 2006) Ph.D. degree, University of Bucharest, Department of Philosophy, Chair of Theoretical Philosophy and Logic; Topic: The concept of representation in cognitive science
● (1999-2000) New Bulgarian University, Department of Cognitive Science (Sofia, Bulgaria); Postgraduate Student
● (1996-1997) University of Bucharest, Department of Philosophy (Bucharest, Romania) MA – average: 10 (of max. 10); Master Thesis: Inquires on Carnap’s Aufbau
● (1991-1996) University of Bucharest, Department of Philosophy (Bucharest, Romania)
BA – average: 9.50 (of max. 10); Thesis: Kant and the exact sciences
● (1987-1991) Technical University of Iassy, Department of Computer Science (Iassy, Romania) Undergraduate Student
● (May 2013) Jagiellonian University (Krakow, Poland) one month research scholarship within CEEPUS project (international project on Cognitive Science).
● (May 2002) ELTE University (Budapest, Hungary) one month research scholarship within CEEPUS project (international project on Cognitive Science).
● (2002-2003) University of New York, Department of Philosophy (New York, USA) Fulbright Scholarship
● (May 2002) University of Viena, Department of Philosophy (Vienna, Austria) Scholarship offered by CEEPUS project-an international project on Cognitive Science
● (January 2002) Washington University, Department of Philosophy (Saint Louis, USA); Scholarship offered by CNCSIS project
● (1998-1999) University of Oxford, Department of Experimental Psychology (Oxford, Great Britain) Soros Scholarship; Supervisors: Prof. Martin Davies and Prof. Peter McLeod; Adviser: Prof. E. T. Rolls
● Since 2009, Lecturer Professor, Department of Philosophy, University of Bucharest (Bucharest, Romania)
● (2009-2010) I hold a course on Philosophy of Cognitive Science, one semester for graduates (MA), Department of Automatic Control and Computers, Polytechnic University of Bucharest
● (1997-2009) Assistant-Professor, Department of Philosophy, University of Bucharest (Bucharest, Romania)
● (1997-2003) Initiator and co-ordinator of the Group for Cognitive Science, University of Bucharest (Bucharest, Romania)
● CEEPUS Project (coordinator lect. Gabriel Vacariu)
Academic related activities
● (29.03.2014) Videoconference “Epistemologically different worlds applied to cognitive neuroscience”, Symposium of Psychiatry, School of Medicine, Institute of Technology and Higher Education, Nuevo Leon (Monterrey, Mexico). (“I Simposium de la Unidad de Rehabilitación Psiquiátrica de los Servicios de Salud de Nuevo León y del Instituto Tecnológico y de Estudios Superiores de Monterrey”). (Schedule at http://www.jornadasurp.com/#!horarios/ctnu) (a photo with this videoconference )
● (2013) Reviewer at Synthese – An International Journal for Epistemology, Methodology and Philosophy of Science (USA)
● (04.12.2013) Presentation “The world vs. epistemologically different worlds“, Department of Philosophy, Bucharest University
● (27.11.2013) Presentation “Did Markus Gabriel (Bonn University) plagiarize my ideas?“, Department of Philosophy, Bucharest University
● (06.11.2013) Round table on Mihai Vacariu’s book “In love with Tarkovski – A small treatise of living art”. Participants: Cristi Puiu, Elena Dulgheru, Gabriel Vacariu, Mihai Vacariu, Mihai Fulger at Cinemateca Romana, Eforie Room
● (28.06. 2013) I organized a Round-Table live on the Internet: “Micro-neuronal level and/or macro-neuronal level in explaining cognition”. Participants: John Bickle (Mississippi State University) at 13.00-New York (28th July), Adele Abrahamsen, William Bechtel (University of California, San Diego), Gabriel Vacariu (Bucharest University) at 20.00-Bucharest (28th July), and William Uttal (Arizona State University) at 07.00-Hawaii (29th July), Department of Philosophy, University of Bucharest. Parts of this round-table discussion at https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC_3I96MSwXpUjm2x6f6SaUA
● (22.07.2013) I organized the round-table: “The role of neuroscience in explaining cognition“. Participants: William Bechtel (Philosophy, University of California, San Diego), Adele Abrahamsen (Project Scientist in the Center for Research in Language, University of California, San Diego), Maria-Luiza Flonta (Neuroscience, Biology, UB),Mircea Dumitru (Philosophy, UB), Bogdan Amuzescu (Neuroscience, Biology, UB), Gabriel Vacariu (Philosophy, UB), Faculty of Philosophy (University of Bucharest).
● (20.06.2013) Presentation “Troubles with cognitive neuroscience and the hyperverse”, Department of Biology, Bucharest University
● (29.05.2013) “Prezentare despre viata si opera sculptorului Constantin Brancusi“, Facultate de Filosofie, Universitatea Bucuresti
● (09.05.2013) Presentation “Cognitive neuroscience and the hyperverse”, Institute of Psychology, Jagiellonian University (Krakow, Poland)
● (04.04. 2013) Gheorghe Stefanov and Gabriel Vacariu: debate on the status of conceptual art, Department of Philosophy, University of Bucharest
● (29.11.2012) Presentation “The beauty and the hyperverse“, (A parallel between art and philsophy of the last century), Faculty of Philosophy, Univ. of Bucharest
● In 2012, I re-included my department in CEEPUS project (Central European Exchange Program for University Studies): “Cognitive Science, Knowledge Studies, and Knowledge Technologies”, University of Vienna, the main coordinator. Departments belong to universities from Albania, Austria, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Slovacia, and Slovenia.
● (7.09.2012) Presentation “God died long time ago. How can we rule out the infinite?“, Summer school “Science, religion, philosophy: Teism vs. Ateism”, Department of philosophy, Univ. of Bucharest.
● (28.04.2012) Presentation “What kind of science is cognitive neuroscience?” in Symposium “The mind-brain relationship in cognitive neuroscience”, Department of Philosohy, Univ. of Bucharest
● (27-28.04.2012) I organized the symposium – “The mind-brain relationship in cognitive neuroscience” at Department of Theoretical Philosophy, Faculty of Philosophy, University of Bucharest. Participants: Bogdan Amuzescu (Biology, University of Bucharest), Violeta Ciobanu (Psychology, University of Bucharest) Ioan Dumitrache (Faculty of Automatic Control and Computer Science, Polytechnic University of Bucharest), Mircea Dumitru (Philosophy, University of Bucharest), Marius Dumitru (Christ Church, Oxford), Luiza-Maria Flonta (Biology, University of Bucharest), Gheorghe Stefanov (Philosophy, University of Bucharest), Gabriel Vacariu (Philosophy, University of Bucharest), Leon Zagrean (Neuroscience – University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Bucharest) Adriana Zbant (Philosophy, University of Bucharest)
● (16.11.2011) Presentation “Being and the Hyperverse” in “Seminars of Theoretical Philosophy”, Department of Philosophy, University of Buchares. Presentation PDF
● (16.11.2011) Round table “The role of philosophy in science“. Participants: Bogdan Amuzescu (biologie), Mircea Flonta, Ilie Parvu, Gheorghe Stefanov and Gabriel Vacariu
● (26.03.2009) Presentation – “ ‘Representation’ in Cognitive Science“, “Engineering-Mind” Group, The Faculty of Automatic Control and Computers, Bucharest
● (10.07.2007) Presentation – “The ‘unicorn-world’ and its Ptolemaic epicycles in cognitive science/philosophy of mind” at the 8th conference of the Australasian Society for Cognitive Science, University of Adelaide, Australia.
http://www.arts.adelaide.edu.au/humanities/ascs2007/ (abstract at “Download proceedings”)
● (09.2006) Presentation within Panel D (Are there useful ways to think about the mind? With Hales, Sutton, Vacariu) at INA/Brain Sciences: Neurophilosophy workshop, (Scope: the complex relationship between mind and brain, as viewed by psychiatrists, neuroscientists and philosophers), University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.
(at http://www.brainsciences.unsw.edu.au/BrainSciWeb.nsf/page/presentations – see INA/Brain Sciences UNSW Neurophilosophy Workshop, 10 September – (PDF) )
● (03.05.2002) (with Dalia Terhesiu) Presentation -“Brain, mind and Robinson Crusoe in the 21st century” – at the 19th Annual Workshop- “New Trends in Cognitive Science”- organized by the European Society for the Study of Cognitive System and Austrian Society for Cognitive Science, Salzburg, Vienna
● (03.2002) Co-ordinatorof“The Spring School on Cognitive Science”within the CEEPUS project and “Complexity Theory” Research Project. Participants- professors and students from: Faculty of Vienna, Vienna, Austria, New Bulgarian University, Sofia, Bulgaria; Department of Philosophy, Ljubljana, Slovenia; ELTE University, Budapest, Hungary; Department of Mathematics, Department of Linguistics, Department of Philosophy, Department of Biology (University of Bucharest)
● (03.2002) Presentation -“The principle of ontological complementarity” – at “Spring School on Cognitive Science”, University of Bucharest, Bucharest
● (01.2002) Presentation -“Some key elements in Cognitive Science ” – at Washington University in Saint Louis, USA, Philosophy-Neuroscience-Psychology program
● (27-30.12.2001) Participant to APA annual meeting in Atlanta, USA
● (05.2001) Presentation “Representations“ at International Spring School on Cognitive Science, Bucharest, University of Bucharest
● (07.2000), (07.1999) Participant at International Summer School on Cognitive Science, Sofia, Bulgaria
● (05.2000), (05.2001), (03.2002) Initiator and co-ordinator of“International Spring School on Cognitive Science”, CEEPUS project.
● (06.1998) Participant at International Summer School on Philosophy of Science, Central European University, Budapest, Hungary
● (09.1997) Participant at International Colloquium on Representation and Demarcation in Philosophy and Cognitive Science, Predeal, Romania
● (05.1997) Presentation “Remarks on Carnap’s AUFBAU” at Romanian-Finnish Colloquium on Logic, Philosophy of Science and Cognitive Science, Predeal, Romania
● (11.1993) Participant to a round table on “Determinism and Indeterminism” at the Romanian Academy, Institute of Philosophy, Iassy, Romania
General fields of interest:
Philosophy of Cognitive (Neuro)Science, Philosophy of Physics, Philosophy of mind, Kant
Special topics of interest: the relationship between mind and brain in cognitive science; the mind-body problem; localization, the binding problem, the spatial perception, “localization” in cognitive neuroscience, representation in cognitive science/philosophy of mind; emergence, supervenience and reductionism problems; computationalism, connectionism and dynamical system approaches in cognitive science, the “I” (self) in cognitive neuroscience and philosophy; the relationship between general theory of relativity and quantum mechanics (the relationship between micro- and macro-entities), what exist/is, entities and their interactions
Teaching experience – Courses and seminars
Contact: gvacariu [at] yahoo.com
Fi Communications (Public Relations)