当前位置: X-MOL 学术European Journal for Philosophy of Science › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
Scientific perspectivism in the phenomenological tradition
European Journal for Philosophy of Science ( IF 1.5 ) Pub Date : 2020-06-16 , DOI: 10.1007/s13194-020-00294-w
Philipp Berghofer 1
Affiliation  

In current debates, many philosophers of science have sympathies for the project of introducing a new approach to the scientific realism debate that forges a middle way between traditional forms of scientific realism and anti-realism. One promising approach is perspectivism. Although different proponents of perspectivism differ in their respective characterizations of perspectivism, the common idea is that scientific knowledge is necessarily partial and incomplete. Perspectivism is a new position in current debates but it does have its forerunners. Figures that are typically mentioned in this context include Dewey, Feyerabend, Leibniz, Kant, Kuhn, and Putnam. Interestingly, to my knowledge, there exists no work that discusses similarities to the phenomenological tradition. This is surprising because here one can find systematically similar ideas and even a very similar terminology. It is startling because early modern physics was noticeably influenced by phenomenological ideas. And it is unfortunate because the analysis of perspectival approaches in the phenomenological tradition can help us to achieve a more nuanced understanding of different forms of perspectivism. The main objective of this paper is to show that in the phenomenological tradition one finds a well-elaborated philosophy of science that shares important similarities with current versions of perspectivism. Engaging with the phenomenological tradition is also of systematic value since it helps us to gain a better understanding of the distinctive claims of perspectivism and to distinguish various grades of perspectivism.

中文翻译:

现象学传统中的科学视角

在当前的辩论中,许多科学哲学家都对为科学现实主义辩论引入一种新方法的项目表示同情,该新方法在科学现实主义和反现实主义的传统形式之间建立了中间道路。一种有前途的方法是透视主义。尽管透视主义的不同支持者在透视主义的各自特征上有所不同,但共同的想法是科学知识必定是局部的和不完整的。透视主义是当前辩论中的一个新位置,但它确实有其先驱者。在这种情况下通常提到的数字包括杜威,费耶阿本德,莱布尼兹,康德,库恩和普特南。有趣的是,据我所知,没有任何作品讨论与现象学传统的相似之处。这是令人惊讶的,因为在这里可以找到系统上相似的想法,甚至是非常相似的术语。之所以令人吃惊,是因为早期现代物理学受到现象学思想的明显影响。这是不幸的,因为在现象学传统中对透视方法的分析可以帮助我们对透视形式的不同形式有更细微的了解。本文的主要目的是表明,在现象学传统中,人们发现了一种精心设计的科学哲学,与当前版本的透视主义有着重要的相似之处。从事现象学传统也具有系统性的价值,因为它有助于我们更好地理解透视主义的独特主张,并区分各个层次的透视主义。
更新日期:2020-06-16
down
wechat
bug