scholarly journals КУНОВЕ ИДЕЈЕ НАУЧНИХ РЕВОЛУЦИЈА И ОБЈЕКТИВНОСТ НАУКЕ

TEME ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 845
Author(s):  
Katarina Tomašević ◽  
Sanela D Andrić ◽  
Srđan M Milašinović
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Twentieth Century ◽  
Philosophy Of Science ◽  
Scientific Knowledge ◽  
Normal Science ◽  
Scientific Revolutions ◽  
New Concepts ◽  
Gradual Process ◽  
The Sixties ◽  
History Of

Kun’s The structure of the scientific revolutions triggered the avalanche of criticism and represents the most conducive and most critical work of the sixties until the eighties of the twentieth century in which the problems of understanding scientific knowledge are discussed. The development of science was understood as a gradual process during which the stages of normal science and scientific revolutions are being shifted. Boldly, by introducing new concepts in the history of philosophy of science, he has received many opponents, but also many followers. In this paper, we tried to present Kun's understanding of the progress in the science and criticism of his greatest opponents, with a reference to the scientific revolutions in social sciences. We also tried to answer the question of whether the scientific revolutions have been depleted and what is happening with the objectivity of science.

Die Macht der Institution

2021 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Twentieth Century ◽  
Welfare State ◽  
Cultural Anthropology ◽  
The State ◽  
History Of Ideas ◽  
The Social ◽  
History Of ◽  
Post War

This volume examines Arnold Gehlen’s theory of the state from his philosophy of the state in the 1920s via his political and cultural anthropology to his impressive critique of the post-war welfare state. The systematic analyses the book contains by leading scholars in the social sciences and the humanities examine the interplay between the theory and history of the state with reference to the broader context of the history of ideas. Students and researchers as well as other readers interested in this subject will find this book offers an informative overview of how one of the most wide-ranging and profound thinkers of the twentieth century understands the state. With contributions by Oliver Agard, Heike Delitz, Joachim Fischer, Andreas Höntsch, Tim Huyeng, Rastko Jovanov, Frank Kannetzky, Christine Magerski, Zeljko Radinkovic, Karl-Siegbert Rehberg and Christian Steuerwald.

“A Page from the History of Marxism”: Gefter’s Edevours to Read Marx Anew

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (3-1) ◽  
pp. 11-34
Author(s):  
Svetlana Neretina ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Twentieth Century ◽  
Ussr Academy ◽  
Strategy Development ◽  
Early 20Th Century ◽  
Historical Science ◽  
Historical Process ◽  
The Sixties ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Academy Of Sciences

The purpose of this paper is to show how the thought and speech of people holding and defending directly opposite positions affect the change in the thought and speech of people of their own and subsequent generations, with different life orientations, and to find ways of this influence. The author describes the situation that arose at the end of the sixties of the twentieth century, known as the ideological dispersal of philosophical, historical and sociological trends that ran counter to the policy of the CPSU, which became especially fierce in the fight against opponents after the USSR’s invasion of Czechoslovakia in August, 1968. One of the results of such an ideological battle was the defeat of the sector of the methodology of history of the Institute of General History of the USSR Academy of Sciences, headed by M. Ya. Gefter, who published a series of books in which the so-called laws of historical development (formational approach) were questioned and the fundamental provisions of the classics of Marxism-Leninism were criticized. The subject of analysis is Gefter’s article “A Page from the History of Marxism in the Early 20th Century”, published in the book “Historical Science and Some Problems of the Modernity”, dedicated to the analysis of Lenin’s tactics and strategy development which changed the views of many, especially young, historians on the historical process, and most importantly - on the methods of seeking and expressing the truth. The differences were expressed primarily in the fact that the proponents and defenders of the Soviet regime, which was based on their own established norms of Marxism-Leninism, fearlessly used all means of pressure on unwanted opponents. Professionals, however, who tried to understand the true sense of the historical process, the sense of judgments about it, especially the sense of the revolutionary struggle against the autocracy, unfolding at the beginning of the twentieth century, were forced to use the Aesopian language, which also provoked a distortion of this sense in many ways: due to the nebulous and veiled expressions, which give the impression of theoretical blackmail, causing such consequences as speech irresponsibility.

Situating Tribes in History: Lessons from the Archives and the Social Sciences

2021 ◽  
Vol 53 (3) ◽  
pp. 473-476
Author(s):  
Nadav Samin
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Twentieth Century ◽  
Middle East ◽  
Middle Eastern ◽  
Record Keeping ◽  
Know How ◽  
The Social ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Many ◽  
Official Records

The tribe presents a problem for the historian of the modern Middle East, particularly one interested in personalities, subtleties of culture and society, and other such “useless” things. By and large, tribes did not leave their own written records. The tribal author is a phenomenon of the present or the recent past. There are few twentieth century tribal figures comparable to the urban personalities to whose writings and influence we owe our understanding of the social, intellectual, and political history of the modern Middle East. There is next a larger problem of record keeping to contend with: the almost complete inaccessibility of official records on the postcolonial Middle East. It is no wonder that political scientists and anthropologists are among the best regarded custodians of the region's twentieth century history; they know how to make creative and often eloquent use of drastically limited tools. For many decades, suspicious governments have inhibited historians from carrying out the duties of their vocation. This is one reason why the many rich and original new monographs on Saddam Hussein's Iraq are so important. If tribes are on the margins of the records, and the records themselves are off limits, then one might imagine why modern Middle Eastern tribes are so poorly conceived in the scholarly imagination.

Does Popper Explain Historical Explanation?

1995 ◽  
Vol 39 ◽  
pp. 225-240
Author(s):  
Kenneth Minogue
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Free Will ◽  
Philosophy Of Science ◽  
Religious Belief ◽  
Scientific Method ◽  
History Of Philosophy ◽  
Historical Explanation ◽  
The Social ◽  
History Of

It is one of Karl Popper's great distinctions that he has an intense—some would say too intense—awareness of the history of philosophy within which he works. He knows not only its patterns, but also its comedies, and sometimes he plays rhetorically against their grain. He knows, for example, that the drive to consistency tends to turn philosophy into compositions of related doctrines, each seeming to involve the others. Religious belief, for example, tends to go with idealism and free will, religious scepticism with materialism and determinism. Popper does not believe in a religion, was for long some kind of a socialist, and takes his bearings from the philosophy of science. Aha! it seems we have located him. Here is a positivist, a materialist, probably a determinist. But of course he denies he is any of these things. Again, like many modern thinkers, he wants to extend scientific method not only to the social sciences but also to history. So far so familiar, until we discover that he regards nature as no less ‘cloudy’ than human societies.

Critical Realism for Ethnography

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Grant Banfield
Keyword(s):  
Social Sciences ◽  
Philosophy Of Science ◽  
Critical Realism ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
Sociological Practice ◽  
Critical Realist ◽  
The Social ◽  
History Of ◽  
Theoretical Developments ◽  
British Philosopher

While specific applications of critical realism to ethnography are few, theoretical developments are promising and await more widespread development. This is especially the case for progressive and critical forms of ethnography that strive to be, in critical realist terms, an “emancipatory science.” However, the history of ethnography reveals that both the field and its emancipatory potential are limited by methodological tendencies toward “naïve realism” and “relativism.” This is the antimony of ethnography. The conceptual and methodological origins of ethnography are grounded in the historical tensions between anti-naturalist Kantian idealism and hyper-naturalist Humean realism. The resolution of these tensions can be found in the conceptual resources of critical realism. Working from, and building upon, the work of British philosopher Roy Bhaskar, critical realism is a movement in the philosophy of science that transcends the limits of Kantian idealism and Humean realism via an emancipatory anti-positivist naturalism. Critical realism emerged as part of the post-positivist movement of the late 1960s and early 1970s. From its Marxian origins, critical realism insists that all science, including the social sciences, must be emancipatory. At its essence, this requires taking ontology seriously. The call of critical realism to ethnographers, like all social scientists, is that while they must hold to epistemological caution this does not warrant ontological shyness. Furthermore, critical realism’s return to ontology implies that ethnographers must be ethically serious. Ethnography, if it is to hold to its progressive inclinations, must be about something. Critical realism for ethnography pushes the field to see itself as more than a sociological practice. Rather, it is to be understood as a social practice for something: the universalizing of human freedom.

MODERN ANGLOPHONE PHILOSOPHY: BETWEEN THE SEMINAR ROOM AND THE COLD WAR

2006 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 547-557 ◽  
Author(s):  
BRUCE KUKLICK
Keyword(s):  
New York ◽  
Twentieth Century ◽  
Cold War ◽  
Philosophy Of Science ◽  
Cambridge University ◽  
Princeton University ◽  
Seminar Room ◽  
History Of ◽  
Scott Soames ◽  
The Cold War

George A. Reisch, How the Cold War Transformed Philosophy of Science: To the Icy Slopes of Logic (Cambridge and New York, Cambridge University Press, 2005)Scott Soames, Philosophical Analysis in the Twentieth Century. Vol. 1, The Dawn of Analysis; Vol. 2, The Age of Meaning (Princeton, Princeton University Press, 2003)Although How the Cold War Transformed Philosophy of Science is narrower in scope, the two books included in this review by and large cover the same ground—the history of anglophone philosophy in the first two-thirds of the twentieth century. Nonetheless, the two authors occupy two different universes, and it is instructive to examine the issues and styles of thought that separate their comprehension of analytic philosophy.

scholarly journals Dimensão escatológica da Igreja. Um estudo do capítulo VII da Lumen Gentium

2017 ◽  
Vol 77 (306) ◽  
pp. 407-437
Author(s):  
Cleto Caliman ◽  
Renato Alves de Oliveira
Keyword(s):  
Nineteenth Century ◽  
Twentieth Century ◽  
Vatican Ii ◽  
Human Existence ◽  
Christian Theology ◽  
Ongoing Process ◽  
Lumen Gentium ◽  
The Sixties ◽  
History Of ◽  
New Perspective

Síntese: Nesse trabalho apresentamos como o Concílio Vaticano II entra no processo de redescoberta da escatologia que se deu na virada do séc. XIX para o séc. XX no contexto da investigação sobre o Jesus histórico. Esse processo desemboca nos anos 50 e 60 do séc. XX, sob a inspiração do Princípio-Esperança de E. Bloch, na Teologia da Esperança de J. Moltmann. Passamos da compreensão da escatologia como último tratado da dogmática, os Novíssimos, para uma dimensão transcendental que perpassa toda a teologia cristã desde os seus fundamentos. Desta forma, deixamos para trás o paradigma clássico da teologia que girava em torno da filosofia da essência, para um novo paradigma em torno da filosofia da existência, respondendo às exigências da compreensão do ser humano própria da modernidade. Nossa hipótese é que o Concílio Vaticano II assimila em seus principais documentos essa nova perspectiva e, especificamente, na Lumen Gentium, cap. VII, sobre A índole escatológica da Igreja peregrina e sua união com a Igreja celeste.Palavras-chave: Escatologia. Cristologia. Igreja. História da salvação. Vaticano II.Abstracts: This Essay aims to present the way the Vatican II Council rediscover Eschatology. A process that was going on since the of the nineteenth century up to the twentieth century as the investigations about the historical Jesus began. This ongoing process reaches the fifties and the sixties of the twentieth Century inspired both by the Hope-Principle of E. Bloch and Moltmann’s Theology of Hope. There is a new understanding of eschatology that moves from Dogmatics’ last treatise to a transcendental dimension that touches the whole of the Christian theology on its very foundations. In this way, we leave behind theology’s classical paradigm based on an essentialist philosophy to a new one reflecting of a philosophy of Human Existence. This change in perspective meets the demands of a new understanding of man in modernity. In our view the Vatican II Council assimilates in its main documents this new perspective as we find for example in the Lumen Gentium cap. VII, where it deals with the eschatological nature of the Pilgrim Church and its union with the Celestial Church.Keywords: Eschatology. Christology. Church. The History of Salvation. Vatican II.

scholarly journals Similarities, Differences, and Missed Connections between Thomas S. Kuhn, Gaston Bachelard and the Continental Historiography of Science

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 94-111
Author(s):  
Alberto Fragio
Keyword(s):  
Twentieth Century ◽  
Philosophy Of Science ◽  
History Of Science ◽  
European History ◽  
Gaston Bachelard ◽  
Historical Turn ◽  
Michael Friedman ◽  
Historiography Of Science ◽  
History Of ◽  
Important Object

AbstractAccording to the American philosopher, Michael Friedman, while triggering the so-called “historical turn,” Kuhn reinstated the history of science as perhaps the most important object for the philosophy of science. In this paper, I show that this reinstatement is rather a rehabilitation of the philosophical and epistemological uses of the history of science, something already present in the continental historiography of science in the first half of the twentieth century, and especially in Gaston Bachelard’s work. In this sense, I undertake a review of the European history and philosophy of science during that period, paying special attention to Gaston Bachelard as one of the leading representatives of the French historical epistemology of the 1930s. I conclude with the late and quite problematic reception of Bachelard’s thought in the early work of Thomas S. Kuhn. My thesis is this strand may help to outline what is continental history and philosophy of science.

scholarly journals Evolutionary theories and the philosophy of science

2021 ◽  
Vol 37 (2) ◽  
pp. 229-246
Author(s):  
Georgy S. Levit ◽  
◽  
Uwe Hossfeld ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Natural Selection ◽  
Philosophy Of Science ◽  
Evolutionary Theory ◽  
History Of Biology ◽  
Darwinian Revolution ◽  
Common Descent ◽  
Scientific Revolutions ◽  
Research Programmes ◽  
History Of ◽  
Mathematical Sciences

Philosophical theories proceeding from the history of physical-mathematical sciences are hardly applicable to the analysis of biosciences and evolutionary theory, in particular. This article briefly reconstructs the history of evolutionary theory beginning with its roots in the 19th century and up to the ultracontemporary concepts. Our objective is to outline the dynamics of Darwinism and anti-Darwinism from the perspective of the philosophy of science. We begin with the arguments of E. Mayr against the applicability of T. Kuhn’s theory of scientific revolutions to the history of biology. Mayr emphasized that Darwin’s publication of the Origin of Species in 1859 caused a genuine scientific revolution in biology, but it was not a Kuhnian revolution. Darwin coined several theories comprising a complex theoretical system. Mayr defined five most crucial of these theories: evolution as such, common descent of all organisms including man, gradualism, the multiplication of species explaining organic diversity, and, finally, the theory of natural selection. Distinguishing these theories is of great significance because their destiny in the history of biology substantially differed. The acceptance of one theory by the majority of the scientific community does not necessarily mean the acceptance of others. Another argument by Mayr proved that Darwin caused two scientific revolutions in biology, which Mayr referred to as the First and Second Darwinian Revolutions. The Second Darwinian Revolution happened already in the 20th century and Mayr himself was its active participant. Both revolutions followed Darwin’s concept of natural selection. The period between these two revolutions can be in no way described as “normal science” in Kuhnian terms. Our reconstruction of the history of evolutionary theory support Mayr’s anti-Kuhnian arguments. Furthermore, we claim that the “evolution of evolutionary theory” can be interpreted in terms of the modified research programmes theory by Imre Lakatos, though not in their “purity”, but rather modified and combined with certain aspects of Marxian-Hegelian dialectics.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document