Authors
Nabeel Hamid
Concordia University
Abstract
ABSTRACTThis paper elaborates a conception of the unity of science that emerges in the context of Dilthey’s well-known treatment of the distinction between the Naturwissenschaften and the Geisteswissenschaften. Dilthey’s account of the epistemological foundations of the Geisteswissenschaften presupposes, this paper argues, their continuity with the natural sciences. The unity of the two domains has both a psychological and a biological basis. Whereas the psychological functions at work in scientific thinking, the articulation of which is the task of Dilthey’s proposed science of ‘descriptive and analytic psychology’, are common to both kinds of sciences, their ontological ground consists in the embodied and environmentally situated context of human beings, and is expressed in Dilthey’s central concept of ‘life’. Accordingly, this paper develops the shared biopsychological foundations of the epistemology of the natural and human sciences from Dilthey’s writings in the 1880s and 1890s. Dilthey’s conception of unity, furthermore, has implications for philosophy’s orientation towards the special sciences. Thus, in conclusion, this paper applies the biopsychological account to sketch an outline of Dilthey’s historicist method in the philosophy of science, and considers its similarities and differences with a contemporary approach in ‘historical epistemology’.
Keywords Dilthey  unity of science  historicism  structuralism  historical epistemology
Categories (categorize this paper)
ISBN(s)
DOI 10.1080/09608788.2016.1158691
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 63,319
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Logical Foundations of the Unity of Science.Rudolf Carnap - 1991 - In Richard Boyd & Philip Gasper (eds.), The Philosophy of Science. MIT Press.
Historical Epistemology.Lorraine Daston - 1994 - In James K. Chandler, Arnold Ira Davidson & Harry D. Harootunian (eds.), Questions of Evidence: Proof, Practice, and Persuasion Across the Disciplines. University of Chicago Press. pp. 282--289.
Methodology of the Sciences.Lydia Patton - 2015 - In Michael Forster & Kristin Gjesdal (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of German Philosophy in the Nineteenth Century. Oxford University Press. pp. 594-606.

View all 16 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Inner Experience and Articulation: Wilhelm Dilthey’s Foundational Project and the Charge of Psychologism.Katherina Kinzel - 2018 - Hopos: The Journal of the International Society for the History of Philosophy of Science 8 (2):347-375.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

'Hypotheses, Everywhere Only Hypotheses!': On Some Contexts of Dilthey's Critique of Explanatory Psychology.Uljana Feest - 2005 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 38 (1):43-62.
Wilhelm Dilthey And Hermeneutic Philosophy.Wolfgang RÖd - 2012 - Studia Philosophica Wratislaviensia 7 (1):93-104.
Methodology of the Sciences.Lydia Patton - 2015 - In Michael Forster & Kristin Gjesdal (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of German Philosophy in the Nineteenth Century. Oxford University Press. pp. 594-606.
Hermeneutik im Ubergang von Dilthey zu Heidegger.Guillaume Fagniez - 2013 - Studia Phaenomenologica 13:429-447.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2016-03-24

Total views
48 ( #222,230 of 2,448,750 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
2 ( #302,300 of 2,448,750 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes