Prolegomena 4 (1):3-27 (2005)

Authors
Andrej Ule
University of Ljubljana
Abstract
Raspravljamo o ulozi predpojmovnog kompleksnog mišljenja u znanstvenoj spoznaji i razvoju znanosti. Kompleksno mišljenje sa svom heterogenošću i imaginacijom omogućuje održavanje pojmovne strukture i reorganizaciju cjelokupnih teorijskih mreža, ali to “naplaćuje” latentnim prisustvom protuslovlja i nekonzistentnosti.Članak se nastavlja na našu analizu odnosa između kompleksnog i pojmovnog mišljenja u Aristotelovoj Fizici. Ako je kod Aristotela središnji kompleks pojam “mjesta”, kod Galileija je osnovni kompleks zbirka gibanja-stanja. Galilei još nema izrađenu potpunu pojmovnu strukturu mehanike pa možemo reći da je njegova teorijska osnova uronjena u kompleksnu razinu, ali se oslanja na matematičku strukturu i eksperiment i time uspijeva formirati jednu stabilnu teorijsku organizaciju. Time dobiva osnovu za novu teorijsku sistematizaciju i za formiranje pojmovne strukture kakva je Newtonova. Možemo u izvjesnom smislu reći da je time kompleksno mišljenje u znanosti bilo podignuto na višu razinu i dovedeno u pred-paradigmično razdoblje.We discuss the role of the pre-conceptual complex thought in scientificknowledge and in the development of science. The heterogeneity and imagination of complex thought enables the preservation of the conceptual structure and helps reshape entire theoretical nets, however, its downside is reflected in its latent contradiction and inconsistency. This paper is a continuation of our analysis of the relationship between complex and conceptual thought in Aristotle’s Physics. If Aristotle’s central complex is the notion of “place”, then Galileo’s basic complex is the notion of “ movement”. Since Galileo didn’t have an elaborated conceptual structure of mechanics, we can say that his theoretical basis is “steeped” in the level of complex thought, yet it relies on the mathematical structure and experiment, thereby creating a stable theoretical organization which serves as a basis for the new theoretical systematization and for the shaping of a conceptual structure as Newton’s. Thus, we may claim that, in a certain way, this change raised complex thought in science to a higher level, and brought it to a pre-paradigmatic period
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Translate to english
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 57,041
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Galileo at Work: His Scientific Biography.Stillman Drake - 1980 - Philosophy of Science 47 (1):154-156.
Concepts of Mass in Classical and Modern Physics.Patrick Suppes - 1965 - Philosophical Review 74 (2):260-262.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Daniel C. Dennett-Kraj čarolije–Religija kao prirodna pojava.Goran Punda - 2010 - Kairos: Evangelical Journal of Theology 4 (1):178-179.
Uloga identiteta u podučavanju filozofije.Marjan Šimenc - 2011 - Synthesis Philosophica 26 (1):45-58.
Uloga Zla U Istoriji.Risto Tubić - 2005 - Narodna Knjiga-Alfa.
Uloga Duha Svetoga u Rimljanima 8.Ksenija Magda - 2007 - Kairos: Evangelical Journal of Theology 1 (2):201-219.
Uloga Biblije u svakodnevnom življenju.Stanko Jambrek & Ljubinka Jambrek - 2010 - Kairos: Evangelical Journal of Theology 4 (2):213-232.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2013-12-01

Total views
15 ( #648,454 of 2,410,726 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
10 ( #66,935 of 2,410,726 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes