scholarly journals Scientist as Parrhesiastes

Author(s):  
Francesco Scotognella

The scientific community of the XX and XXI centuries is a very large companionship, very fragmented and spread all over the world. Moreover, the status of the scientist, which in most cases is a member of the States’ apparati, is significantly different with respect to the one of the scientists up to the First World War.The concepts of scientific revolution of Thomas Kuhn and scientific anarchy of Paul Feyerabend should be reconsidered in this contest. In particular, the anarchist modus operandi should be shifted from the scientific method, that has become significantly standardized with protocols, to the sociology of the scientific community. A pluralism of the scientific method is possible, but an anarchy in the relationships among scientists emerges as more important. The scientist is in many cases a parrhesiastes, a person that says the truth even when he is going to pay because of that, that defends the developed theory or model, by respecting the protocols established in the scientific community. On the other side, each scientist should be a patient beholder that accepts the more solid, and intersubjectively recognized, theories of other scientists.

2021 ◽  
Vol 17 (25) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
Francesco Scotognella

The scientific community of the XX and XXI centuries is a very large companionship, very fragmented and spread all over the world. Moreover, the status of the scientist, which in most cases is a member of the States’ apparati, is significantly different concerning the one of the scientists up to the First World War.The concepts of the scientific revolution of Thomas Kuhn and the scientific anarchy of Paul Feyerabend should be reconsidered in this contest. In particular, the anarchist modus operandi should be shifted from the scientific method, which has become significantly standardized with protocols, to the sociology of the scientific community. Pluralism of the scientific method is possible, but anarchy in the relationships among scientists emerges as more important. The scientist is in many cases a parrhesiastes, a person that says the truth even when he is going to pay because of that, that defends the developed theory or model, by respecting the protocols established in the scientific community. On the other side, each scientist should be a patient beholder that accepts the more solid, and intersubjectively recognized, theories of other scientists.


Author(s):  
Francesco Scotognella

The scientific community of the XX and XXI centuries is a very large companionship, very fragmented and spread all over the world. Moreover, the status of the scientist, which in most cases is a member of the States’ apparati, is significantly different with respect to the one of the scientists up to the First World War.The concepts of scientific revolution of Thomas Kuhn and scientific anarchy of Paul Feyerabend should be reconsidered in this contest. In particular, the anarchist modus operandi should be shifted from the scientific method, that has become significantly standardized with protocols, to the sociology of the scientific community. A pluralism of the scientific method is possible, but an anarchy in the relationships among scientists emerges as more important. The scientist is in many cases a parrhesiastes, a person that says the truth even when he is going to pay because of that, that defends the developed theory or model, by respecting the protocols established in the scientific community. On the other side, each scientist should be a patient beholder that accepts the more solid, and intersubjectively recognized, theories of other scientists.


Author(s):  
Dudley Shapere

When one scientific theory or tradition is replaced by another in a scientific revolution, the concepts involved often change in fundamental ways. For example, among other differences, in Newtonian mechanics an object’s mass is independent of its velocity, while in relativity mechanics, mass increases as the velocity approaches that of light. Earlier philosophers of science maintained that Einsteinian mechanics reduces to Newtonian mechanics in the limit of high velocities. However, Thomas Kuhn (1962) and Paul Feyerabend (1962, 1965) introduced a rival view. Kuhn argued that different scientific traditions are defined by their adherence to different paradigms, fundamental perspectives which shape or determine not only substantive beliefs about the world, but also methods, problems, standards of solution or explanation, and even what counts as an observation or fact. Scientific revolutions (changes of paradigm) alter all these profoundly, leading to perspectives so different that the meanings of words looking and sounding the same become utterly distinct in the pre- and post-revolutionary traditions. Thus, according to both Kuhn and Feyerabend, the concepts of mass employed in the Newtonian and Einsteinian traditions are incommensurable with one another, too radically different to be compared at all. The thesis that terms in different scientific traditions and communities are radically distinct, and the modifications that have stemmed from that thesis, became known as the thesis of incommensurability.


2019 ◽  
Vol 60 (1) ◽  
pp. 24-44
Author(s):  
Brendan D Dooley ◽  
Sean E Goodison

Abstract Thomas Kuhn posits that the structure of science promotes revolutionary discovery. The decision of a scientific community to discard the status quo in favour of a revolutionary paradigm is influenced by sociological forces. Karl Popper disagreed, arguing that falsification is required. An examination of a random sample of 501 articles published in 14 peer-reviewed American outlets in criminology and criminal justice from 1993 to 2008 is coupled with oral histories from 17 leading criminologists in determining which approach best characterizes criminology. Twelve per cent of papers falsify theory. When not explicitly falsified, atrophy occurs when theory is overused (exhaustion), ignored (indolence) and subjected to a sustained critique (assault). The intention of the effort is to document and describe falsification and then invite further discourse.


2015 ◽  
Vol 50 (3) ◽  
pp. 334-350 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrew F Cooper ◽  
Vincent Pouliot

Is the G20 transforming global governance, or does it reinforce the status quo? In this article we argue that as innovative as some diplomatic practices of the G20 may be, we should not overstate their potential impact. More specifically, we show that G20 diplomacy often reproduces many oligarchic tendencies in global governance, while also relaxing club dynamics in some ways. On the one hand, the G20 has more inductees who operate along new rules of the game and under a new multilateral ethos of difference. But, on the other hand, the G20 still comprises self-appointed rulers, with arbitrary rules of membership and many processes of cooption and discipline. In overall terms, approaching G20 diplomacy from a practice perspective not only provides us with the necessary analytical granularity to tell the old from the new, it also sheds different light on the dialectics of stability and change on the world stage. Practices are processes and as such they are always subject to evolutionary change. However, because of their structuring effects, diplomatic practices also tend to inhibit global transformation and reproduce the existing order.


2012 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 49-57
Author(s):  
Eleonora Melnik

Realizing existing environmental problems the contemporary humanity is seeking new ways of interaction with environment. On the one hand it lies in development of innovative technologies in manufacturing process which reserve natural resources and focus on en-hancement of environment. On the other hand it implies introduction of environmental knowledge into all spheres of education. Psychological science claims that a person of postindustrial society is spiritually distanced from nature and the increasing formal religiosity doesn’t prevent them from developing a pragmatic view on their being. Striving to take every-thing from life “right now and right here” has made an impact on development of values. They have changed for the worse. The process of human mentality change is long-term. It requires organization of special institutions which would study these issues from the early childhood to make a child understand the role of environment as the most important value needed for preserving the life on the Earth. That is why it is very important for children to want and for teachers to able to carry out this process jointly. World viewing component of environmental education is intended to find out human’s belonging to the world – whether a person is “in” the world, “out” of world or “above” the world – and to organize the system of knowledge which would correspond to this understanding of human’s place in the world where environment would act as the main value of life and work. It is significant to change the character of relationships between the contemporary society and the environment; it should be developed on the basis of such principles as subordination, coordination and corre-lation. It is necessary to research the order of interrelations, the character of interrelation of elements and transformation of elements in the environment. Supporting the statement that knowledge is the basis of any education we claim that the content of environmental educa-tion being a part of general education with its complex and integrated character can provide comprehensive study of the environment to students. Nature, human being and society - bio-logical and social – genetic unity of existence should be reflected in education standards: pro-grammes, study-books, methodological literature, etc. The content of education determines the form of training: traditional lessons, outdoor training, excursions, research and project activity of students. Environmental education should have lifelong character: from childhood till elderly. Continuity of education – from the past to the present and future- should be im-plemented in the sphere of knowledge as well as in the sphere of traditional relationships with nature and people. It is also reasonable to consider such characteristics as direct results of educational activity – knowledge, skills, experience, kinds of activity and achievements; and indirect results – changes in social life of humans, their behavior and relationships with nature and people. On the whole the analysis of the problem of environmental education in Russia shows that the interest of young people to natural science is on the same level of that in other Euro-pean countries and it is not high. However as a result of reforms of secondary and higher edu-cation the natural science subjects have become electives. It can be expected that low level of interest to such subjects as physics, chemistry and biology will turn into decrease of number of those who would like to get knowledge of these subjects. Considering the demographic sit-uation in the country we can predict decline of teaching load, absence of demand for such teachers and, at the end, loss of pedagogical staff in schools and universities. That is why mentioned above projects on upgrading environmental education with the goal to improve the environmental situation in the country and nature preservation remain in the status of scientific projects. That is to say that there is an understanding of the necessity to improve education for better life in the country but now it is still on the stage of formal declaration. Key words: environmental education, environmental knowledge, values of life.


1943 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 177-193
Author(s):  
Waldemar Gurian

“Russian policy is a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma,” Winston Churchill stated. But Joseph Stalin claimed: “Our policy is simple and clear.” These statements which apparently contradict each other can be reconciled. For the mysterious character of the Russian foreign policy is the result, precisely, of the apparent clearness of its principles. Since its birth, the Soviet regime has always described itself as the standard-bearer of the Marxian doctrine and the Communist world revolution; yet this aim has always permitted the use of the most varied methods. Glaring contradictions in practice were defended by the same slogans and formulas. On the one hand, the Soviet regime, apparently sacrificed Russia to the world revolution; on the other hand, it seemed to put the world revolution into the service of the proletarian fatherland. The Soviet regime utilized the German opposition to the status quo created by the treaty of Versailles as well as the French fear of German imperialism and of Germany's attempts to obtain mastery in Europe and throughout the world. The Soviet regime for years regarded moderate Socialists as its most hated enemies, but later it tried to cooperate with them in the anti-Fascist Popular Front. The leaders of the Soviets sometimes proclaimed that the world revolution was around the corner but that belief has not prevented them at other times from regarding it only as a remote possibility in a far distant future.


2019 ◽  
pp. 77-86
Author(s):  
Sergei V. Pakhomov ◽  

The concept of jīvanmukti, “liberation during life”, arose in Advaita Vedānta as a response to the paradigm of “disembodied” liberation (videhamukti). The condition of jīvanmukti is highly appreciated in Tantrism. The concept of jīvanmukti often includes the meanings of identification with the absolute, the supreme deity. There are different kinds of jīvanmukti, for example, active and passive ones. The state of jīvanmukti is the complete independence, highest ideal, spiritual perfection. Jīvanmukta considers the entire objective world to be a reflection of the higher Self. The status of jīvanmukta can have an ideological dimension when it is opposed to traditions that are considered ineffective in Tantra. The acquisition of jīvanmukti is primarily due to spiritual knowledge. On the one hand, knowledge is a certain state of the carrier of knowledge himself; on the other hand, it is always knowledge of “something”. Although jīvanmukti can be reached through almost all tantric practices, there is a certain gradation of the time spent on it. The man reaches liberation during life not in isolation from the world. Outwardly, jīvanmukta cannot stand out among ordinary members of society; all his uniqueness is hidden inside his consciousness.


2006 ◽  
pp. 69-92
Author(s):  
Liudmyla O. Fylypovych

Ukrainian religious studies has recently entered the world scientific community. Acquaintance with Western science, which has proven to be heterogeneous, often based on different methodological approaches and methodological means, has coincided with difficult internal transformations that have undergone all humanitarian knowledge in Ukraine after worldviews and political changes in society. In pursuit of its identity, domestic religious studies went, on the one hand, by contrasting itself with theology, and on the other, by distinguishing itself from scientific atheism. At first, the emergence of religious studies from the bosom of ideologized social science was more relevant. In the form of a critical study of religion, Soviet-era religious studies were included in scientific atheism. Therefore, religious studies came not as knowledge of religion, but as its critique.


The article is devoted to the consideration of the good ethics metaphysical basis. As a phenomenon whose nature is transcendent, the good reveals itself in two projective optics. It is on the one hand about the ontological aspects of the good ethics, acting as a being together mode. On the other hand, the relevance of the human charitable nature to the good ethics principles. Thus, the good builds the basis, the output operating mode of co-existence. The phenomenon has objective properties and a universal character. In other words, goodness creates the condition, the nature of the order of being. This logic has traces of Socrates, which identifies concepts: good, knowledge and virtue. Good is a living knowledge that acquires the status of Truth – the knowledge of real. It opens to the person the essence of its purpose, improves and transforms its personality. It is about spiritual knowledge that opens to a person who knows, in the process of mastering the world around him. This knowledge fills the personality with the content, gives uniqueness. It is a living knowledge, aimed at improving the image, its spiritual development, growth. And, consequently, the projection of knowledge-good at the level of society acts as a mechanism for organizing and maintaining social order. A person who through the social context knows the ethical principles of good (love, respect, complicity, etc.), comprehends the laws of the spiritual order. She is an integral part of the order, and thus recognizes itself as real, unique, finds a connection to reality. The transformation of these principles into cultural universal, opens the world to the world as a single whole, an integral part of which is itself. With the explication of meanings, culture «introduces» a person in the previously compiled symbolic-communicative space, forming the ability to understand, with the message, with participation, in general forms an orientation to the community, the integrity of social relations. In this perspective well-being issues are opened. This is the principle of the spiritual knowledge power, realized in accordance with human principles of the good ethics.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document