A première vue, la différence que Kant fait dans sa Critique de la raison pure entre jugements particulier et singulier semble être dénuée d’une véritable importance philosophique. D’ailleurs, dans cette même veine, l’on s’est demandé très tôt s’il fallait vraiment que les catégories soient regroupées par trois plutôt que par deux, puisque la troisième semble résulter de la connexion des deux autres, et c’est l’observation que le fidèle Johann Schultz s’enhardira à faire respectueusement au philosophe dans une lettre de 1784 (...) dont nous aurons à reparler. Entre-temps, l’on s’est habitué: le caractère tout d’abord déconcertant de l’architectonique kantienne est ce qui disparaît à l’usage, sinon à l’usure; et s’il ne perd rien de son caractère insolite aux yeux des générations d’étudiants qui se penchent avec perplexité sur ces pages sacrées, cet «art des systèmes» paraît un décor baroque que l’on finit par oublier par la force de l’habitude pour se concentrer sur ce qui ferait office d’intrigue et peut se raconter à qui n’aurait pas lu l’oeuvre. (shrink)

Qu'est-ce qu'un 'philosophe', au regard de l'histoire et singulièrement du XXIe siècle? Frank Pierobon, en s'appuyant sur son propre parcours et aussi sur ses dix années d'engagement dans la riche aventure des Matins-Philo à Bruxelles, tente d'apporter une réponse située à la question. Loin des imageries populaires, il fait du philosophe un homme de métier et de savoir-être dont toute l'existence oscillerait entre la création de concepts et, en même temps, une quête incessante du désir de sens. Un (...) texte court et fulgurant qui redit que nul n'est dispensé de philosopher. (shrink)

Avatar, le film de James Cameron (2009), aura ete un succes commercial d'une ampleur exceptionnelle, a considerer davantage comme le symptome d'une certaine societe en crise spirituelle, que comme l'expression personnelle d'un createur, fut-il exceptionnel. Sur cette base, Frank Pierobon, au terme d'une deconstruction tres poussee, en extrait l'embleme de notre postmodernite finissante: un Deus ex Fantasma, soit une derisoire redemption par le reve, faute de tout autre salut.

La conception qu'Emmanuel Kant se faisait des mathematiques etait en parfaite consonance avec l'opinion philosophique la plus courante au XVIIIe siecle a l'egard de cette science. Il conviendrait par consequent de tenir davantage compte de l'histoire des idees scientifiques, ce qui permettrait de faire remarquer que la pensee kantienne releve d'un paradigme scientifique plus ancien, celui de la geometrie euclidienne (ou l'image reste intimement articulee au signe), alors que les critiques ordinairement adressees au Kant mathematicien s'appuient indirectement sur l'heritage de (...) la revolution algebrique par lequel le signe est desormais dissocie de l'image. Il convenait donc d'examiner dans le plus grand detail la maniere dont, a travers son oeuvre, Kant recevait et discutait les conceptions mathematiques de son temps, et en particulier la tension marquee entre la geometrie et l'arithmetique. Ce faisant, il redevient possible de recontextualiser le concept kantien d'intuition par rapport aux evidences de son temps, qui ne sont plus tout a fait les notres. Les reticences de Kant vis-a-vis des concepts les plus problematiques de l'algebre se laissent ainsi interpreter a nouveaux frais, faisant ressortir la signification de l'architectonique. (shrink)

La Critique de la raison pure d'Emmanuel Kant est incontestablement l'un des ouvrages-clefs de la tradition philosophique. Paradoxalement, la fascination qu'elle a durablement exercée sur des générations de philosophes est à la mesure du mystère de sa construction dont on a maintes fois constaté la rigueur et l'omniprésence, mais dont on a peu examiné, jusqu'à présent, les conditions de possibilité. Pourtant Kant ne se lasse pas de souligner la prépondérance de la systématicité, qu'il appelle " architectonique ", dans la fonction (...) critique de sa pensée. Cette architectonique est souvent assimilée à une quelconque architecture de façade et qui serait à la philosophie ce que devrait être un bon système de rangement pour une bibliothèque : rien de plus qu'une commodité instrumentale qui ne peut rien ajouter à la valeur littéraire des livres qui y sont rangés. A l'opposé de cette conception naïve et réductrice, il faut prendre conscience de ce que l'architectonique régit jusqu'au détail l'essentiel de la pensée kantienne et, loin de constituer un système de juxtaposition rhétorique, guide d'une main sûre la pensée, là où celle-ci devient aveugle. Il s'agit non seulement de la très célèbre illusion transcendantale, mais encore de ce qui ne se laisse pas représenter adéquatement : l'idée. Or le système architectonique de la raison pure dépend lui-même d'une idée et de ce fait reste principalement inexponible en une seule représentation conceptuelle. Cet ouvrage livre non seulement la structure architectonique complète sous-jacente à la Critique mais encore retrouve le schème kantien de l'architectonique qui permet de penser cette description en tant que complète, à travers le jeu d'éclipses dont la logique transcendantale fait son propos. Les lecteurs de Kant seront en particulier intéressés par la reconstitution génétique de la table des catégories en tant que système et par l'explication de cette apparence propre à la table des catégories et, par là, à l'entendement pur (c'est-à-dire la logique formelle), d'être sans fondement, sans racine, comme la connaissance absolue d'un entendement intuitif. Jetant ainsi de nouvelles lumières sur cet ouvrage méconnu à force d'être commenté, Kant et la fondation architectonique de la métaphysique en propose une lecture dont l'originalité tient à ce qu'elle prend la Critique de la raison pure au pied de la lettre et qu'ainsi elle en retrouve l'esprit authentique et en révèle la vertigineuse modernité. (shrink)

This book is a welcome contribution to the literature on Kant's philosophy of mathematics in two particular respects. First, the author systematically traces the development of Kant's thought on mathematics from the very early pre-Critical writings through to the Critical philosophy. Secondly, it puts forward a challenge to contemporary Anglo-Saxon commentators on Kant's philosophy of mathematics which merits consideration.A central theme of the book is that an adequate understanding of Kant's pronouncements on mathematics must begin with the recognition that mathematics (...) in Kant's time was poised at the beginning of what Pierobon calls the ‘algebraic revolution’ of the nineteenth century. For Kant, Euclidean geometry, with its heavy reliance on the geometric image, was the paradigm of certainty. The algebraic revolution of the nineteenth century replaced that paradigm with an algebraic formalism, thereby freeing mathematics from any connection to the geometric image, and also severing the link to intuition. Pierobon describes this as the ‘divergence between the image and writing [l'écriture]’. So great was the shift, Pierobon suggests, that, after the developments of the nineteenth century, it became difficult to find any sense in Kant's conception of mathematics as sensible knowledge. This, certainly, was the view of Russell, who notoriously claimed in Mysticism and Logic that modern developments in logic dealt a ‘fatal blow to the Kantian philosophy’ and that ‘the whole doctrine of a priori intuitions, by which Kant explained the possibility of pure mathematics, is wholly inapplicable to mathematics in its present form’.1 Pierobon claims, though, that much of Anglo-Saxon commentary on Kant's philosophy of mathematics begins from this ‘rationalist and logicist’ position, reading Kant's philosophy of mathematics from a post-algebraic-revolution perspective. This book attempts to offer a corrective to that position by offering a Kantian conception of mathematics …. (shrink)

Die {raquo}Revolution der Denkart{laquo} hat nicht nur den Anlauf genommen, welchem sie ihren Namen verdankt.! Gezahlt werden noch weitere Umstellungen der Theorie bildung als bloG die kopernikanische Kants. Hier interessieren gleich zwei. Die eine liefert den Gegenstand, die entsprechende, RevolutionPhanomenologie.

Does the universe embody beautiful ideas? Artists as well as scientists throughout human history have pondered this "beautiful question." With Nobel laureate Frank Wilczek as your guide, embark on a voyage of related discoveries, from Plato and Pythagoras up to the present. Wilczek's groundbreaking work in quantum physics was inspired by his intuition to look for a deeper order of beauty in nature. In fact, every major advance in his career came from this intuition: to assume that the universe (...) embodies beautiful forms, forms whose hallmarks are symmetry--harmony, balance, proportion--and economy. There are other meanings of "beauty," but this is the deep logic of the universe--and it is no accident that it is also at the heart of what we find aesthetically pleasing and inspiring. As he reveals here, this has been the heart of scientific pursuit from Pythagoras, the ancient Greek who was the first to argue that "all things are number," to Galileo, Newton, Maxwell, Einstein, and into the deep waters of twentieth-century physics. Gorgeously illustrated, A Beautiful Question is a mind-shifting book that braids the age-old quest for beauty and the age-old quest for truth into a thrilling synthesis. Yes: the world is a work of art, and its deepest truths are ones we already feel, as if they were somehow written in our souls.--From publisher description. (shrink)

One of our great contemporary scientists presents ten insights that illuminate what every thinking person needs to know about what the world is and how it works. Nobel Prize winner Frank Wilczek's Fundamentals is built around a simple but profound idea: the models of the world we construct as children are practical and adequate for everyday life, but they do not bring in the surprising and mind-expanding revelations of modern science. To do that, we must look at the world (...) anew, combining clear thinking with an openness to wonder. This "born again" world is in many ways larger, fuller, and much stranger than it appears. Through an exploration of space, time, matter, and ideas--and equipped with facts, questions, and brilliant speculations--Wilczek guides us through the past, present, and future of fundamental science. Readers will emerge with an expanded vision of our universe. Author Bio: Frank Wilczek won the Nobel Prize in Physics in 2004 for work he did as a graduate student. He was among the earliest MacArthur fellows, and has won many awards both for his scientific work and his writing. He is the author of A Beautiful Question, The Lightness of Being, Fantastic Realities, Longing for the Harmonies, and hundreds of articles in leading scientific journals. His "Wilczek's Universe" column appears regularly in the Wall Street Journal. Wilczek is the Herman Feshbach Professor of Physics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, founding director of the T. D. Lee Institute and chief scientist at the Wilczek Quantum Center in Shanghai, China, and a distinguished professor at Arizona State University and Stockholm University. (shrink)

An argument for the inclusion of the human perspective within science and how it makes science possible.

**** Reprint of the Indiana U. Press edition of 1966--which is cited in BCL3. Annotation copyright by Book News, Inc., Portland, OR.

Although declarations of the death of God seem to be provocations announcing the end of the era of theology, this announcement is actually central to the Christian revelation in its most classic forms, as well as to its reworkings in contemporary religious thought. Indeed provocative new possibilities for thinking theologically open up precisely in the wake of the death of God. Already Hegel envisaged a revolutionary new realization of divinity emerging in and with the secular world through its establishment of (...) a total order of immanence. However, in postmodern times this comprehensive order aspired to by modern secularism implodes or cracks open towards the wholly Other. A hitherto repressed demand for the absolute difference of the religious, or for “transcendence”, returns with a vengeance. This difference is what could not be stated in terms of the Hegelian System, for reasons that poststructuralist writers particularly have insisted on: all representations of God are indeed dead. Yet this does not mean that they cannot still be powerful, but only that they cannot assign God any stable identity. Nietzsche’s sense of foreboding concerning the death of God is coupled with his intimations of the demise of representation and “grammar” as epistemologically bankrupt, but also with his vision of a positive potential for creating value in the wake of this collapse of all linguistically articulated culture. He points the way towards the emergence of a post-secular religious thinking of what exceeds thought and representation. (shrink)

Der Übergang vom Verhältnisbewußtsein zum Selbstbewußtsein kann unmöglich nur vom Verhältnisbewußtsein aus gedacht werden, weil wir uns eine Welt, in der das Bewubtsein unserer selbst verteilt ist auf die Dimensionen der Handlung vor deren Zentrierung in uns, gar nicht vorstellen können. Jedes Tableau der Handlungsmöglichkeiten, so abstrakt es auch abgefaßt sein mag, ist gebunden an Vorstellungen möglicher Handlungssubjekte, denen wir Handlungsmöglichkeiten zuschreiben. Handlungstheorie ist daher notwendig Reflexion unserer Praxis, in der wir uns selbst als Selbstbewußtsein erfahren, das seinem Verhältnisbewubtsein enthoben (...) ist, ohne dieses dadurch selbst schon aufzuheben zu können. Daß uns Freiheit im Handeln unaufhebbar prekär und problematisch bleiben mub, ist die Grundvoraussetzung dafür, dab wir Handlungstheorien historisch und bereichsbezogen ständig neu entwerfen müssen. Das Verhältnis von Handlungsphilosophie zu Handlungstheorien kann daher so gefaßt werden, daß Handlungsphilosophie die Grundbegrifflichkeit in kritischer Absicht bereitstellt, die den bereichsorientierten, mehr oder weniger deskriptiven Handlungstheorien abgehen muß. Dazu muß die ontologische Differenz von Handlung und Interpretation methodologisch ernst genommen werden. Die radikale Andersheit der hier zu begründenden Konzeption liegt vor allem in der Ansicht, daß Handlungen nicht als isolierbare Ereignis-Entitäten aufgefaßt werden können, die gegenüber der »Welt der Tatsachen des Bewußtseins« eine kausale, d.h. von der Welt des Bewußtseins abgetrennte Rolle übernehmen. (shrink)

First published in 2000. Routledge is an imprint of Taylor & Francis, an informa company.

Esse trabalho analisa os museus e centros culturais virtuais em suas funções de interação e mediação entre o sujeito e o conhecimento. Partindo da caracterização dos MCCV como forma objetiva da relação sujeito-conhecimento, foram escolhidas oito experiências de MCCV para avaliação técnica e pedagógica. Com base na literatura avaliação de softwares e ambientes computacionais, criou-se uma matriz taxonômica para a análise de cada MCCV. Como resultados, o estudo indicou que há experiências de museus e centros culturais muito bem elaboradas e (...) com bom potencial de apoio à construção do conhecimento por seus usuários. Todavia, observou-se que essas experiências ainda carecem de melhorias para melhor atendimento aos usuários, particularmente aqueles portadores de alguma deficiência. Na sociedade atual, marcada pelo uso intensivo das tecnologias digitais e da escrita, os MCCV apresentam-se como ambientes essenciais para experiências ciberculturais. Palavras-chave: Museus Virtuais. Centros Culturais Virtuais. Mediação. Sociedade Grafocêntrica Digital. (shrink)

Frank Ramsey was the greatest of the remarkable generation of Cambridge philosophers and logicians which included G. E. Moore, Bertrand Russell, Ludwig Wittgenstein and Maynard Keynes. Before his tragically early death in 1930 at the age of twenty-six, he had done seminal work in mathematics and economics as well as in logic and philosophy. This volume, with a new and extensive introduction by D. H. Mellor, contains all Ramsey's previously published writings on philosophy and the foundations of mathematics. The (...) latter gives the definitive form and defence of the reduction of mathematics to logic undertaken in Russell and Whitehead's Principia Mathematica; the former includes the most profound and original studies of universals, truth, meaning, probability, knowledge, law and causation, all of which are still constantly referred to, and still essential reading for all serious students of these subjects. (shrink)

In this paper, I consider the relationship between Inference to the Best Explanation and Bayesianism, both of which are well-known accounts of the nature of scientific inference. In Sect. 2, I give a brief overview of Bayesianism and IBE. In Sect. 3, I argue that IBE in its most prominently defended forms is difficult to reconcile with Bayesianism because not all of the items that feature on popular lists of “explanatory virtues”—by means of which IBE ranks competing explanations—have confirmational import. (...) Rather, some of the items that feature on these lists are “informational virtues”—properties that do not make a hypothesis \ more probable than some competitor \ given evidence E, but that, roughly-speaking, give that hypothesis greater informative content. In Sect. 4, I consider as a response to my argument a recent version of compatibilism which argues that IBE can provide further normative constraints on the objectively correct probability function. I argue that this response does not succeed, owing to the difficulty of defending with any generality such further normative constraints. Lastly, in Sect. 5, I propose that IBE should be regarded, not as a theory of scientific inference, but rather as a theory of when we ought to “accept” H, where the acceptability of H is fixed by the goals of science and concerns whether H is worthy of commitment as research program. In this way, IBE and Bayesianism, as I will show, can be made compatible, and thus the Bayesian and the proponent of IBE can be friends. (shrink)

In this paper, I offer an analysis of the radical disagreement over the adequacy of string theory. The prominence of string theory despite its notorious lack of empirical support is sometimes explained as a troubling case of science gone awry, driven largely by sociological mechanisms such as groupthink (e.g. Smolin 2006). Others, such as Dawid (2013), explain the controversy by positing a methodological revolution of sorts, according to which string theorists have quietly turned to nonempirical methods of theory assessment given (...) the technological inability to directly test the theory. The appropriate response, according to Dawid, is to acknowledge this development and widen the canons of acceptable scientific methods. As I’ll argue, however, the current situation in fundamental physics does not require either of these responses. Rather, as I’ll suggest, much of the controversy stems from a failure to properly distinguish the “context of justification” from the “context of pursuit”. Both those who accuse string theorists of betraying the scientific method and those who advocate an enlarged conception of scientific methodology objectionably conflate epistemic justification with judgements of pursuit-worthiness. Once we get clear about this distinction and about the different norms governing the two contexts, the current situation in fundamental physics becomes much less puzzling. After defending this diagnosis of the controversy, I’ll show how the argument patterns that have been posited by Dawid as constituting an emergent methodological revolution in science are better off if reworked as arguments belonging to the context of pursuit. (shrink)

We develop a Bayesian framework for thinking about the way evidence about the here and now can bear on hypotheses about the qualitative character of the world as a whole, including hypotheses according to which the total population of the world is infinite. We show how this framework makes sense of the practice cosmologists have recently adopted in their reasoning about such hypotheses.

This article rebuts Ramsey's earlier theory, in 'Universals of Law and of Fact', of how laws of nature differ from other true generalisations. It argues that our laws are rules we use in judging 'if I meet an F I shall regard it as a G'. This temporal asymmetry is derived from that of cause and effect and used to distinguish what's past as what we can know about without knowing our present intentions.

" In the generations since, its influence has grown-today it is accepted as a classic of general jurisprudence.The work is a bold and persuasive attack on the ...

In this article, I consider an important challenge to the popular theory of scientific inference commonly known as ‘inference to the best explanation’, one that has received scant attention.1 1 The problem is that there exists a wide array of rival models of explanation, thus leaving IBE objectionably indeterminate. First, I briefly introduce IBE. Then, I motivate the problem and offer three potential solutions, the most plausible of which is to adopt a kind of pluralism about the rival models of (...) explanation. However, I argue that how ranking explanations on this pluralistic account of IBE remains obscure and pluralism leads to contradictory results. In light of these objections, I attempt to dissolve the problem by showing why IBE does not require a ‘model’ of explanation and by giving an account of what explanation consists in within the context of IBE. (shrink)

We attempt to extend the nominalistic project initiated in Hartry Field's Science Without Numbers to modern physical theories based in differential geometry.

In this article, I will provide a critical overview of the form of non-deductive reasoning commonly known as “Inference to the Best Explanation” (IBE). Roughly speaking, according to IBE, we ought to infer the hypothesis that provides the best explanation of our evidence. In section 2, I survey some contemporary formulations of IBE and highlight some of its putative applications. In section 3, I distinguish IBE from C.S. Peirce’s notion of abduction. After underlining some of the essential elements of IBE, (...) the rest of the entry is organized around an examination of various problems that IBE confronts, along with some extant attempts to address these problems. In section 4, I consider the question of when a fact requires an explanation, since presumably IBE applies only in cases where some explanation is called for. In section 5, I consider the difficult question of how we ought to understand IBE in light of the fact that among philosophers, there is significant disagreement about what constitutes an explanation. In section 6, I consider different strategies for justifying the truth-conduciveness of the explanatory virtues, e.g., simplicity, unification, scope, etc., criteria which play an indispensable role in any given application of IBE. In section 7, I survey some of the most recent literature on IBE, much of which consists of investigations of the status of IBE from the standpoint of the Bayesian philosophy of science. (shrink)

Background Various authorities recommend the participation of patients in promoting patient safety, but little is known about health care professionals' (HCPs') attitudes towards patients' involvement in safety-related behaviours. Objective To investigate how HCPs evaluate patients' behaviours and HCP responses to patient involvement in the behaviour, relative to different aspects of the patient, the involved HCP and the potential error. Design Cross-sectional fractional factorial survey with seven factors embedded in two error scenarios (missed hand hygiene, medication error). Each survey included two (...) randomized vignettes that described the potential error, a patient's reaction to that error and the HCP response to the patient. Setting Twelve hospitals in Switzerland. Participants A total of 1141 HCPs (response rate 45%). Measurements Approval of patients' behaviour, HCP response to the patient, anticipated effects on the patient–HCP relationship, HCPs' support for being asked the question, affective response to the vignettes. Outcomes were measured on 7-point scales. Results Approval of patients' safety-related interventions was generally high and largely affected by patients' behaviour and correct identification of error. Anticipated effects on the patient–HCP relationship were much less positive, little correlated with approval of patients' behaviour and were mainly determined by the HCP response to intervening patients. HCPs expressed more favourable attitudes towards patients intervening about a medication error than about hand sanitation. Conclusions This study provides the first insights into predictors of HCPs' attitudes towards patient engagement in safety. Future research is however required to assess the generalizability of the findings into practice before training can be designed to address critical issues. (shrink)