The indispensability of the manifest image

2019 ◽  
Vol 46 (2) ◽  
pp. 162-172
Author(s):  
Mario De Caro

It is very contentious whether the features of the manifest image have a place in the world as it is described by natural science. For the advocates of strict (or scientific) naturalism, this is a serious problem, which has been labelled ‘placement problem’. In this light, some of them try to show that those features are reducible to scientifically acceptable ones. Others, instead, argue that the features of the manifest image are mere illusions and, consequently, have to be eliminated from our ontology. In brief, the two options that are open to strict naturalists for solving the placement problem are ontological reductionism and eliminativism. Other advocates of naturalist philosophy, however, claim that both these strategies fail and, consequently, opt for ‘mysterianism’, the view according to which we cannot give up the recalcitrant features of the manifest image even if we are not able to understand the ways (which certainly exist) in which they could be reduced to the scientific features. Mysterianism has the merit of facing the difficulties that whoever wants to explain reductively, or explain away, the features of the manifest image encounters. It is also a defeatist philosophical view, though, since it considers the most important philosophical problems as unsolvable mysteries. For this reason, I argue that mysterianism can also be taken as a reductio of strict naturalism, given its presumption that all phenomena are either explainable by the natural sciences or to be rejected as illusory. In this article, it is argued that the failures of reductionism, eliminativism and mysterianism should teach us that both the scientific image and the manifest image of the world are essential and mutually irreducible but not incompatible with each other. To support this claim, in the second part of the article, the case of free will is discussed.

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Раиса Николаевна Афонина ◽  
Татьяна Степановна Малолеткина

В статье рассматриваются психодидактические аспекты освоения студентами-гуманитариями содержания естественнонаучных дисциплин. Специфика обучения естественнонаучным дисциплинам студентов-гуманитариев определяется наличием у данной группы обучающихся особенностей восприятия и переработки информации. Для гуманитариев в большей мере характерно превалирование ассоциативного, образного мышления, эмоционального восприятия информации, отторжение формализованных, доказательных способов рассуждений, доминирование реального восприятия окружающего мира над абстрактным, идеализированным. Современные педагогические методики в основном ориентированы на левополушарное восприятие, именно поэтому правополушарные учащиеся оказываются в невыгодном положении. The article deals with psychodidactic aspects of mastering the content of natural sciences by humanities students. The specificity of teaching the natural science disciplines of humanities students is determined by the presence of features of perception and processing of information in this group of students. For the humanities, the prevalence of associative, figurative thinking, emotional perception of information, the rejection of formalized, evidence-based ways of reasoning, the dominance of the real perception of the world over the abstract, idealized, are more characteristic. Modern pedagogical methods are mainly focused on left hemisphere perception, which is why right hemispheric students find themselves at a disadvantage.


Author(s):  
R.R. Ismagilova ◽  
G.Kh. Akhmetshina

The humanitarian potential of school mathematics and natural science disciplines for the education of a person who has a unified representation of the modern picture of the world, its scope and content require more and more study. The humanities-oriented teaching of mathematics and natural sciences at school is implemented in the learning process within the framework of traditional academic disciplines and has the full means for the comprehensive and harmonious development of the student's personality. The use of components of literature, language, history of the native land in the implementation of programs of mathematical, natural science education contributes to the development of interest in learning, the formation of personal values of students. Cognitive interest is created and maintained through the design of problem situations in the classroom, through the development of the ability to solve, develop plot problems that form functional (mathematical and natural science) literacy. The combination of natural science and humanitarian approaches in the representation and assessment of the world in the process of mastering the content of educational disciplines will spiritually enrich every student.


2009 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 4-7
Author(s):  
Vincentas Lamanauskas

Natural science education (NSE) - one of the most actual fields of activity of a comprehensive school. One of most acute problems of today's education - low interest to natural sciences and especially to chemistry. This problem is actual not only in Lithuania, but also all over the world. Many researches of last years specify necessity of perfection of natural science education at all levels of an education system and especially at a level of a primary school. Acquaintance to natural sciences in a primary school does not meet today's requirements. It is necessary to return teaching of natural sciences in primary schools. The main accent of process of natural science education in a primary school should become a different sort of researches and experiments. The teaching and learning process in primary school level should have strong focus on constructivist learning and the role of social interaction in learning. The teachers should be able to improve motivation for learning through enjoyment and giving children some control of their science activities. The primary goal of natural sciences in an primary school is acquaintance of pupils to world around, formation of a complete picture of the world to all complex interrelations that further, in the basic school, to pass to studying separate subjects of a natural cycle (for example, chemistry, physics, biology). One of many reasons of low interest to chemistry - insufficient attention to a component of chemistry in the content of a primary education. For the period of primary school pupils does not receive the basic initial knowledge in chemistry and research skills. On the other hand, teachers of primary classes are not prepared at a sufficient level in sphere of modern natural science education. We should help children learn more about the chemicals that surround them in their everyday life. Also we should to complete the design of equipment and supporting materials for chemistry at the primary school level. It is obvious, that science remains abstract and alien to young students and they are not attracted to further study. We should try to change such a situation. First of all, a complete system for doing practical work from grade 1 to 4 in science must be carefully designed. Finally, we can note, that encouraging interest in the natural sciences is the priority of education (teaching and learning) process in primary school. Key words: science education, primary school, priority of education.


Disputatio ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (59) ◽  
pp. 433-456
Author(s):  
Piotr K. Szalek

Abstract This paper considers the alleged pragmatism of Berkeley’s philosophy using the two Sellarsian categories of ‘manifest’ and ‘scientific’ images of the world and human beings. The ‘manifest’ image is regarded as a refinement of the ordinary way of conceiving things, and the scientific image is seen as a theoretical picture of the world provided by science. The paper argues that the so-called Berkeleian pragmatism was an effect of Berkeley’s work towards a synthesis of ‘manifest’ and ‘scientific’ images through the creation of one unified synoptic vision of the world and was a part of a new conceptual framework within which these two images could be combined.


2009 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 4-7
Author(s):  
Vincentas Lamanauskas

A term “Natural Science(s)” most frequently associates with natural sciences such as physics, chemistry, biology, astronomy, geography, etc., i.e. inanimate and animate nature. An extensive list of sci-ences testifies to the complexity of nature and its problematic character. The senior forms of comprehensive school are taught these sciences as individual subjects with little interdependence. Thus, undivided materiali-ty of nature seems to be “disjointed” and a general view of it is lost. Trying to perceive the phenomena that surround us, we always divide the world into single dimensions (for easier perception). What would happen if a chemist saw the world in a hundred – dimensional universe (following the number of chemical ele-ments)?! How deeply and properly one part may be studied it can never disclose the wholeness (a holistic or systemic aspect). On the other hand, we try to design complex systems from the observed and perceived single-dimensional fragments (for example, periodic law, etc.). In this case, any subject of nature cannot describe the wholeness of it. Of course, the view of general nature cannot be fully displayed within the frame of one of its branches. We have lost the real world as the set of interconnected parts. The pictures of the partial worlds (a world of physics, chemistry, biology, etc.) are fragmentary, incoherent and influence our consciousness as a stream of separate pictures. Therefore, it is necessary to form a system that would comprise the knowledge accumulated by all natural sciences establishing the linkage between subjects, inte-grating the knowledge of natural sciences, creating a picture of the world and turning back to the undivided individual world. Thus, in order to clearly realize and understand our environment and nature, to perceive therein existing relations between phenomena and laws, to have orientation in nature following the latest requirements for a scientific knowledge, it is equally important both, the differentiation and integration of natural sciences: the reconstruction of the “disjoined” nature as a unified system in a more advanced level of a theoretic cognition. The task to be resolved is in no manner easy; still the solution has to necessarily be found. The emphasis is put today on one of the reasons indicating why interest in natural sciences is de-creasing. The point is that natural science education (physics, chemistry, biology, etc.) stands behind the latest academic science achievements. According to N.Lisov (2000), scientific content is a key component of the educational process that promotes general - theoretic and functional - practical literacy of a person. The necessity of systemic thinking (approach) unfolds and implements natural science education. The correlation between human being and nature becomes more and more problematic. Human being cannot be treated only as a component of biosphere. The necessary systemic development of both nature and society is considered to be examined. In other words, a mind strategy is needful in the correlation with nature, society and a technical environment. Hypothetically we can say that nature “created” human being and human being established technical (technological) environment, but the latter “turned back” to both nature and human being. How not to wander? Although every living creature, including human being, is able to keep stability (homeostasis) it has to succeed in changing (evolution) as great stability can harm any organism. The sys-temic approach is extremely important to natural science education. The acknowledgment of a single com-ponent does not afford an opportunity to perceive the whole system. A similar method could be used creating a number of systems. For example, thermodynamics (entro-py, chaos, temperature and thermal energy are fundamental characteristics of thermodynamics), cybernetics (information and management are two fundamental characteristics of cybernetics) and synergetic (a science explaining the links between the phenomena, seeking to find out the origin of new objects that produce new phenomena or disappear) can be examined only as a closely operating system. Nature study (in a broad sense) is a complex, specific subject. Human being needs to be trained to feel nature and research it what makes him able to immediately communicate with it. Nature value awareness, experience and practice impersonation are the fundamental manifestations of the interaction between human being and nature. This is one of the primary tasks of natural science education in the 21st century. Key words: science education, systemic approach, human being, general education.


2020 ◽  
Vol 69 (1) ◽  
pp. 190-193
Author(s):  
А. Jumadillayevа ◽  
◽  
K. Jumadillayev ◽  
Z. Jakupova ◽  
A. Kozybay ◽  
...  

The article deal with the problems of implementing intersubject communications of physics with the natural sciences in natural science education. The relevance, significance, goals, methods and forms of the implementation of intersubject communications of physics with the natural sciences in natural science education are established. It is shown that the only way for future teachers of physics to form deep and systematic knowledge is to prepare them for the implementation of interdisciplinary knowledge. Intersubject communication should be considered as a manifestation in the educational process of the relationship of different sciences. No single science, no matter how significant and developed it may be, can create a holistic view of the world, but can only take part in its formation. Interdisciplinary communication, acting as a bridge connecting all objects and sciences, opens up wide opportunities for the development of specific sciences and the scientific picture of the world. Therefore, interdisciplinary communication, as a prerequisite for the successful development of scientific knowledge, and as a method of searching for new results and cognition, reveals to students the way of understanding the world, and thereby ensures conceptual thinking.


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Adem Mulamustafić

In everyday life, we take there to be ordinary objects such as persons, tables, and stones bearing certain properties such as color and shape and standing in various causal relationships to each other. Basic convictions such as these form our everyday picture of the world: the manifest image. The scientific image, on the other hand, is a system of beliefs that is only based on scientific results. It contains many beliefs that are not contained in the manifest image. At first glance, this may not seem to be a problem. But Mulamustafić shows convincingly that this is a mistake: The world as it is in itself cannot be both the way the manifest image depicts it and the way the scientific image describes it to be.


Author(s):  
Hilary Kornblith

Wilfrid Sellars recognized a conflict between what he called “the scientific image” of our place in the world, and “the manifest image.” Sellars sought, somehow, to join these views together in spite of their apparent conflict. This chapter argues that we should endorse features of the manifest image only to the extent that they are part of the scientific image. It presents a case study in epistemology, showing how these issues play out in discussion of doxastic deliberation. The manifest image of such deliberation is flatly in conflict with the best current scientific theorizing about the nature of deliberative processes. The only reasonable response to such conflict, the chapter argues, is to embrace the scientific account and reject our first-personal view of deliberation as illusory. This case study is suggestive of a broader conclusion about the relationship between the scientific and the manifest image.


2021 ◽  
pp. 217-235
Author(s):  
John Heil

Earlier chapters advanced the idea that the appearances (the manifest image) and reality (as revealed in the scientific image) are not in competition: the scientific image constitutes our best guess as to the nature of truthmakers for truths at home in the manifest image. Along the way, necessitarianism (everything is as it is of necessity) and monism repeatedly inserted themselves into the discussion. The thought that truths of the manifest image could survive intact, even when they appear deeply at odds with the scientific image could prove correct, however, even were the accompanying cosmology misguided. The problem of reconciling free will with the scientific image provides an illustrative test case. Just as truthmakers for truths about moving objects could turn out to include nothing that moves, truths about agents acting freely could be made true by wholly deterministic features of the universe. This is not ‘compatibilism’: a free action is not compatible with the action’s being determined. As in the case of motion, agents and their actions are respectable citizens of the manifest image, their standing not compromised by physics.


Author(s):  
Peter Loptson

This paper identifies a thesis held widely in contemporary empiricist and naturalist metaphysics, viz., causalism — the view that to be is to be part of the causal structure of the world. I argue against this thesis, defending what I call extra-causalism. Claims that entities with no obvious causal role, like unexemplified properties and points of space, are unreal, or, if they are accorded reality, that they must have some discoverable — perhaps merely counter-factual — causal significance, are dogmatic and ad hoc. Another view logically independent of causalism, but often held by its advocates, is what may be called the thesis of ontic levels, the idea that there is a primary or basic sort of being (usually accorded the entities of the natural sciences), and at least one derivative or non-basic kind of being. I argue against this as well, claiming that extra-causalism and the unity of being are compatible with a fully naturalist and empiricist view of the world. Metaphysical causalism appears to involve misunderstanding the actual character and aims of natural science.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document