In Science, Truth, and Democracy, Philip Kitcher develops the notion of well-ordered science: scientific inquiry whose research agenda and applications are subject to public control guided by democratic deliberation. Kitcher's primary departure from his earlier views involves rejecting the idea that there is any single standard of scientific significance. The context-dependence of scientific significance opens up many normative issues to philosophical investigation and to resolution through democratic processes. Although some readers will feel Kitcher has not moved far enough from earlier (...) epistemological positions, the book does represent an important addition to literature on science, society, and values. (shrink)

The Society tor Exact Philosop-hy was founded :in·l97D at a meeting held at McGill University in Montreal on 4-5 November at which was organised iby Mario Bunge. Funding for the meeting iwas provided by SDiii the International Union of Hsistory and Philosophy of cience (vson..

Esta aula inaugural, proferida por Raimon Panikkar no Institut Superior de Ciènces Religioses de Vic, em 2002, analisa o problema da irrelevância a que está condenada a teologia nos dias atuais, a marginalização do teólogo e das faculdades de teologia. O texto procura investigar as causas desta lamentável situação e se pergunta pela possibilidade de mudança deste quadro. Organizada a reflexão nestes três pontos, o escrito diagnostica um desvio da rota evangélica como uma das possíveis causas da perda de relevância (...) da teologia. Investigando a interna relação entre filosofia e teologia, o presente texto desvela os distintos aspectos deste matrimônio. Por um lado, chama-se atenção para a confusão entre os domínios de cada disciplina, por outro, reafirma-se a necessidade de um urgente reenlace entre alma e corpo, filosofia e teologia, respectivamente. Além de abandonar o divórcio com a filosofia, para ressuscitar, a teologia cristã, como expressão da religião da Palavra, deve fazer-se cada vez mais ouvinte do Mistério, abrir-se ao símbolo, evitando converter a fé em uma ideologia. Palavras-chave:Teologia; Filosofia; Cristianismo. ABSTRACT The Aula Magna delivered by Raimon Panikkar in the Superior Institute of Religious Science in Vic, in 2002, analyses the problem of irrelevance to which the theology of the present times, the marginalization of the theologian and the faculties of theology are condemned. The text tries to investigate the causes of this lamentable situation and asks about the possibility of changing this state of affairs. Organized as a reflection on these three points, the text diagnoses the straying from the evangelical pathway as one of the possible causes of this loss of relevance of theology. Investigating the internal relationship between philosophy and theology, the present text reveals the distinct aspects of this union. On one side, it calls attention to the confusion of the dominion of each discipline and on the other; it reaffirms the necessity of an urgent reuniting of the body and the soul, philosophy and theology respectively. Besides abandoning the divorce from philosophy, in order to resurrect Christian theology as an expression of the religion of the Word, it must also become increasingly the listener to the Mystery, opening itself to the symbol, avoiding the conversion of faith into ideology. Key words: Theology; Philosophy; Christianity. (shrink)

This paper is the second part of our recent paper ‘Historical and Epistemological Reflections on the Culture of machines around the renaissance: How s cience and t echnique Work’ (Pisano & Bussotti 2014a). In the first paper—which discussed some aspects of the relations between science and technology from Antiquity to the Renaissance—we highlighted the differences between the Aristotelian/Euclidean tradition and the Archimedean tradition. We also pointed out the way in which the two traditions were perceived around the r enaissance. (...) t he Archimedean tradition is connected with machines: its relationship with science and construction of machines should be made clear. i t is enough to think that Archimedes mainly dealt with three machines: lever , pulley and screw (and a correlated principle of mechanical advantage ). As underlined in the first part, our thesis is that many machines were constructed by people who ignored theory, even though, in other cases, the knowledge of the Archimedean tradition was a precious help in order to build machines. Hence, an a priori idea as to the relations between the Archimedean tradition and construction of machines cannot exist. i n this second part we offer some examples of functioning machines constructed by people who ignored any physical theory, whereas, in other cases, the ignorance of some principles—such as the impossibility of a perpetuum mobile —induced the attempt to construct impossible machines. What is very interesting is that these machines did not function, of course, as a perpetuum mobile , but anyway had their functioning and were useful for certain aims, although they were constructed on an idea which is completely wrong from a theoretical point of view. We mainly focus on the r enaissance and early modern period, but we also provide examples of machines built before and after this period. We have followed a chronological order in both parts, starting from the analysis of the situation in ancient Greece. t herefore, in the first part, we have examined the relations between the Aristotelian/Euclidean and Archimedean traditions from ancient Greece to the early modern age. i n this second part, we analyse the relations of Archimedean tradition/ construction of machines from ancient Greece to the 19 th century, focusing on the mentioned period. We remind the reader that our aim is to prove an epistemological thesis, not to provide a complete historical endeavour. As a correlated article, the reader will find three previous paragraphs in the first above-mentioned article (Pisano & Bussotti, 2014a). (shrink)

Le but de notre exposé est de préciser le rapport de la philosophie des sciences â la philosophie en général, mais essentiellement dans le domaine de la philosophie spéculative. Nous essayons de montrer tout d’abord pourquoi une philosophie des Sciences est nécessaire, surtout de nos jours, au développement d’une philosophie de la raison, en indiquant ses deux aspects principaux: épistémologique d’une part, cosmologique de l’autre. Nous essayons de montrer ensuite pourquoi la philosophie des ciences ne.saurait être toute la philosophie de (...) la raison: celle-ci continue d’avoir besoin d’une métaphysique, parce qu’elle n’est pas seulement rapport à l’objet, mais rapport à l’absolu, conscience intérieure et puissance d’idées. (shrink)

According to some authors, Popper’s realism is blatantly incoherent mainly because of his commitment with the correspondence theory of truth and due to the fact that in his theory of cience is granted that, though the general aim of science is the search for truth, it might happen that a specific theory reaches that aim without us being able of knowing it. In this paper, I explain, briefly, the particularities of Popper’s realism, his views on truth as a regulative (...) ideal for science, and I show that, regardless the impossibility of establishing in a efinitive way that truth has been reached, there is no incoherence that endangers his project. In this way, I answer Cardenas and others’ criticisms against Popper’s realism and his views on the general aim of science, and I identify the sources from which this kind of misunderstanding springs. (shrink)

Abstract: In the present work we have made a critical review of the philosophical propo­ sal of Norwood R. Hanson with the aim of exposing the limits of its theoretical approach on the problem of interpretation in science. The first part of this work exposes the hansonian project, looking for evidence of his contributions to the philosophy of science and scientific thinking. In the following two sections we present a critique to his philosophical proposal. We present two exercises of philosophical (...) reflection that constitute two complementary moments of analysis. On one hand, at the level of methodological analysis, we present a discussion about how the “reversible perspective figures” that have been used for the author as arguments to explain his philosophical proposal, are insufficient to the descrip­ tion of the process of observation and interpretation. On the other hand, at the theoretical level, we question his notion of language and categories to show that his theoretical pro­ posed “vision-interpretation” has based on epistemological and analytic notions. From this perspective, it will be shown that the “hermeneutical-interpretative” approach of Hanson is incomplete, since it does not develop towards an ontology of language and observation. (shrink)

A questão do método na Ciência da Lógica (CL) é uma das mais controvertidas na discussão da filosofia de Hegel. O artigo defende a opinião de que o “método absoluto” de fato apresenta uma estrutura formal definida e distinta que seja o princípio geral de todo o desenvolvimento do sistema hegeliano (maduro). Defende essa interpretação contra mal-entendimentos, sobretudo contra aquele que um tal método geral tornaria a CL num formalismo vazio. O método hegeliano é apresentado como método do determinar, sendo (...) que a CL, fundamentalmente e originariamente, não e outra coisa que uma teoria de determinações aprióricas do pensar, i.é, de categorias, regras e formas lógicas. O artigo argumenta em favor da pretensão à universalidade e incondicionalidade que Hegel atribui a seu método. Quer mostrar que é exatamente essa incondicionalidade do método, e nada mas, que sustenta a necessidade e a imanência do proceder do pensar puro e, com isso, sustenta toda a pretensão à “ciência absoluta” e ao “idealismo absoluto” hegeliano. No final, porém, o texto oferece uma crítica interna a este método, que modifica decisivamente a pretensão de Hegel, embora não a destrua fundamentalmente. É que o próprio método contém um momento de indeterminação ou contingência. Essa crítica conduz ao conceito do “acaso” como princípio originário e intransponível de toda dialética e, com isso, de todo determinar-se. Determinação se realiza no acaso da dialética. O acaso dialético e o princípio de toda realidade. PALAVRAS-CHAVE – Hegel. Método. Ciência da Lógica. ABSTRACT The question of the Method in the Science of Logic (SL) is among the most controversially debated in the discussions on Hegel. This article defends the view that there actually is a definite and distinct formal structure underlying the whole development of Hegel’s (mature) system which he himself presents as the “Absolute Method”. This interpretation is defended against misunderstandings, especially against the opinion that such a method should turn the SL into a empty formalism. Hegel’s Method is explained as method of determining, the SL being primarily and fundamentally nothing else but a theory of the aprioric determinations of thinking, i.e. of categories, logical rules and forms. The article arguments in favor of the universality and unconditionality which Hegel claims for his Method. It tries to show that it is exactly this unconditionality of the Method, and nothing else, which supports the necessity and immanence of “pure thinking” and consequently supports Hegel’s claim to “absolute science” and “absolute idealism”. Finally, however, the article offers a critique of this Method, which modifies it fundamentally without destroying it totally. It is argued that there is a moment of indeterminacy or of contingency within the very Method of determining. This critique will lead to the concept of “accident” or “chance event” as original principle of all dialectics and, with this, of all determining. KEY WORDS – Hegel. Method. Science of Logic. (shrink)