Husserl’s Phenomenology and Contemporary Science

1997 ◽  
pp. 211-234 ◽  
Author(s):  
Harry P. Reeder
Keyword(s):  
Contemporary Science

The Legacy of the Outstanding Economist (The Centenary of Maurice Allais)

2011 ◽  
pp. 4-15
Author(s):  
A. Belyanin ◽  
I. Egorov
Keyword(s):  
Present Article ◽  
Nobel Prize ◽  
Nobel Prize Winner ◽  
Contemporary Science

The paper is devoted to Maurice Allais, the Nobel prize winner and one of the most original and deep-thinking economist whose centenary is celebrated this year. The authors describe his contributions to economics, and his place in contemporary science - economics and physics, as well as his personality and philosophy. Scientific works by Allais, albeit translated into Russian, still remain little known. The present article aims to fill this gap and to pay tribute to this outstanding intellectual and academic, who deceased last year, aged 99.

Innovations in the aspect of contemporary science methodology

2016 ◽  
pp. 3-17
Author(s):  
Evgenia Guseva
Keyword(s):  
Research Strategies ◽  
Building Research ◽  
Postindustrial Society ◽  
Contemporary Science ◽  
Library Studies ◽  
Science Methodology

The author examines innovations as an aspect of science advancement. This phenomenon is interpreted within the context of contemporary philosophic concepts which has an impact on building research strategies in library studies in the contemporary information postindustrial society.

Riemann–Weyl in Deleuze's Bergsonism and the Constitution of the Contemporary Physico-Mathematical Space

2015 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 59-87 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martin Calamari
Keyword(s):  
Field Theory ◽  
Gauge Field ◽  
Fibre Bundle ◽  
History Of Mathematics ◽  
Gauge Field Theory ◽  
Contemporary Science ◽  
Explicit Mention ◽  
History Of ◽  
Key Features ◽  
Bernhard Riemann

In recent years, the ideas of the mathematician Bernhard Riemann (1826–66) have come to the fore as one of Deleuze's principal sources of inspiration in regard to his engagements with mathematics, and the history of mathematics. Nevertheless, some relevant aspects and implications of Deleuze's philosophical reception and appropriation of Riemann's thought remain unexplored. In the first part of the paper I will begin by reconsidering the first explicit mention of Riemann in Deleuze's work, namely, in the second chapter of Bergsonism (1966). In this context, as I intend to show first, Deleuze's synthesis of some key features of the Riemannian theory of multiplicities (manifolds) is entirely dependent, both textually and conceptually, on his reading of another prominent figure in the history of mathematics: Hermann Weyl (1885–1955). This aspect has been largely underestimated, if not entirely neglected. However, as I attempt to bring out in the second part of the paper, reframing the understanding of Deleuze's philosophical engagement with Riemann's mathematics through the Riemann–Weyl conjunction can allow us to disclose some unexplored aspects of Deleuze's further elaboration of his theory of multiplicities (rhizomatic multiplicities, smooth spaces) and profound confrontation with contemporary science (fibre bundle topology and gauge field theory). This finally permits delineation of a correlation between Deleuze's plane of immanence and the contemporary physico-mathematical space of fundamental interactions.

What is a Process of Individuation?

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Didier Debaise
Keyword(s):  
Contemporary Philosophy ◽  
Historical Aspects ◽  
The Real ◽  
Contemporary Science ◽  
The Status

This chapter poses the question of “reality”. In opposition to a substantialist vision that has notably characterized modernity, Whitehead develops a processual conception of the real which is made of becomings and individuations. This vision of the real is envisaged starting from three distinct questions: First of all, how to exactly define a process of individuation? This question is treated in its historical aspects (Aristotle and Leibniz) and with respect to contemporary philosophy (Simondon and Deleuze). Secondly, where do the forms, the puissances, the virtualities derive from which accompany any individuation? Starting from this question it is most notably the relation with Platonism and its heritage that is elaborated. And third, which vision of time is implied in a theory of individuation? Even though close to Bergson, Whitehead’s philosophy profoundly differs from it with respect to the status of time and builds up new links with contemporary science.

What is a Complex? Freudian Resistances

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Simon Morgan Wortham
Keyword(s):  
Value Theory ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
The Political ◽  
Industrial Complex ◽  
Military Industrial Complex ◽  
Noam Chomsky ◽  
Cultural Legacy ◽  
Contemporary Science ◽  
The Common ◽  
Post War

This chapter evaluates the question of the ‘complex’ in a range of scientific, political and psychoanalytic contexts, asking not only where lines of connection and demarcation occur among specific distributions of meaning, value, theory and practice; but also probing the psychoanalytic corpus, notably Freud’s writings on the notion of a ‘complex’, in order to reframe various implications of the idea that this term tends to resist its own utilisation as both an object and form of analysis. This section establishes connections between three sets of theoretical questions: the common practice of describing modernity and its wake in terms of a drive towards increasing complexity; the meaning and cultural legacy of phrases such as ‘military-industrial complex’ and sundry derivations in the political sphere; and the intricacies and ambiguities subtending the term ‘complex’ within psychoanalytic theory. As a concept that Freud both utilised and repudiated, the provocative power of the term ‘complex’ is linked to the way it thwarts various attempts at systemization (providing nonetheless an apparatus of sorts through which contemporary science, Slavoj Žižek, Noam Chomsky, Freud, Eisenhower, and post-war politics can be articulated to one another).

Science and Dialectics in the Philosophies of Deleuze, Bachelard and DeLanda

Paragraph ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 29 (2) ◽  
pp. 98-114 ◽  
Author(s):  
James Williams
Keyword(s):  
Gilles Deleuze ◽  
Explanatory Power ◽  
Scientific Theories ◽  
Gaston Bachelard ◽  
Contemporary Science

This article charts differences between Gilles Deleuze's and Gaston Bachelard's philosophies of science in order to reflect on different readings of the role of science in Deleuze's philosophy, in particular in relation to Manuel DeLanda's interpretation of Deleuze's work. The questions considered are: Why do Gilles Deleuze and Gaston Bachelard develop radically different philosophical dialectics in relation to science? What is the significance of this difference for current approaches to Deleuze and science, most notably as developed by Manuel DeLanda? It is argued that, despite its great explanatory power, DeLanda's association of Deleuze with a particular set of contemporary scientific theories does not allow for the ontological openness and for the metaphysical sources of Deleuze's work. The argument turns on whether terms such as ‘intensity’ can be given predominantly scientific definitions or whether metaphysical definitions are more consistent with a sceptical relation of philosophy to contemporary science.

A Critical Study of Violent Asphyxial Deaths with Ancient Perspective

2017 ◽  
Vol 1 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kalpana Denge ◽  
Rupali Gatfane
Keyword(s):  
Present Article ◽  
Modern Science ◽  
Modern Literature ◽  
Critical Study ◽  
Contemporary Science ◽  
Ancient Literature ◽  
Modern Knowledge ◽  
Ancient Texts

Asphyxia is most commonly appearing as a major cause of unnatural deaths. Scattered references can be reviewed in ancient literature regarding asphyxial death. Description of various signs of asphyxial death is given briefly in ancient texts and it is worthwhile to study them with the help of modern science. In ancient literature these asphyxial deaths are described briefly as Kanthapeedan, Dhoomopahat and Udakahat. In modern literature asphyxial deaths are described as hanging, strangulation, suffocation and drowning which occur in homicidal or suicidal purpose or accidental. Viewing these references, asphyxial deaths are studied comprehensively with the object of highlighting it with the help of modern knowledge. Thus present article deals with exploration of ancient references of asphyxial death with the help of contemporary science.

Scientific Collaboration and Collective Knowledge

2017 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Particle Physics ◽  
Scientific Practice ◽  
Collaborative Work ◽  
Scientific Research ◽  
Climate Science ◽  
Collective Knowledge ◽  
Interdisciplinary Field ◽  
Social Structure Of Science ◽  
Contemporary Science ◽  
The Social

Descartes once argued that, with sufficient effort and skill, a single scientist could uncover fundamental truths about our world. Contemporary science proves the limits of this claim. From synthesizing the human genome to predicting the effects of climate change, some current scientific research requires the collaboration of hundreds (if not thousands) of scientists with various specializations. Additionally, the majority of published scientific research is now coauthored, including more than 80% of articles in the natural sciences. Small collaborative teams have become the norm in science. This is the first volume to address critical philosophical questions about how collective scientific research could be organized differently and how it should be organized. For example, should scientists be required to share knowledge with competing research teams? How can universities and grant-giving institutions promote successful collaborations? When hundreds of researchers contribute to a discovery, how should credit be assigned—and can minorities expect a fair share? When collaborative work contains significant errors or fraudulent data, who deserves blame? In this collection of essays, leading philosophers of science address these critical questions, among others. Their work extends current philosophical research on the social structure of science and contributes to the growing, interdisciplinary field of social epistemology. The volume’s strength lies in the diversity of its authors’ methodologies. Employing detailed case studies of scientific practice, mathematical models of scientific communities, and rigorous conceptual analysis, contributors to this volume study scientific groups of all kinds, including small labs, peer-review boards, and large international collaborations like those in climate science and particle physics.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document