首页> 外文期刊>Advances in Historical Studies >History and Reason: The Three Historiographic Paradigms Extracted by Kuhn from Three Scientific Theories
【24h】

History and Reason: The Three Historiographic Paradigms Extracted by Kuhn from Three Scientific Theories

机译:历史与原因:库恩从三种科学理论中提取的三种史学范式

获取原文
       

摘要

The old historiography considered only cumulative, positive scientific results. Koyré’s one instead took into account both successes and errors of scientists in the context of their culture. In 1962, Kuhn introduced a completely new conception of the scientific events based on a ceaseless succession of paradigms and revolutions. The success of his book, The structure of scientific revolutions, was immediate. But more than the “revolution” cited in title of the book, his main concept was the “paradigm”, which is the set of the concepts ruling the scientific practice of a given community. Although largely accepted, Kuhn’s scheme was not spared by criticisms, also from scholars favorable to it. Therefore, throughout his life he was forced to reassess it several times, although never stopping to consider it valid, even when he renounced to apply it to the study of the birth of quanta. In this work, he opposed to the revolution of quanta that previous historians fixed in the years 1900-01, a sort of continuity between the Boltzmann’s classical concepts and the Planck’s mathematics. The debate on Kuhn’s historiographic ideas has been wide and rich in intellectual stimuli. Actually, he took advantage of those stimuli to develop a better definition of his system. Towards the end of his life, with the aim to give a final version to his original scheme, he went back to consider a parallelism between the history of science and the biological evolutionism, already introduced in SSR. The present paper is aimed at analyzing these Kuhn’s suggestions on the methodology of history of science; we will provide an interpretive framework linking each of his different historiographical suggestion with a specific scientific theory; i.e. respectively, the Newtonian mechanics, the thermodynamics and the Darwinian theory of evolution. In other words, we wanted to show that Kuhn always made use of historical categories corresponding to the basic notions of a particular scientific theory.
机译:旧的历史学只考虑了累积的积极科学成果。相反,科耶雷(Koyré)的研究人员在文化背景下既考虑了科学家的成功也考虑了错误。 1962年,库恩(Kuhn)在不断地继承范式和革命的基础上,引入了全新的科学事件概念。他的书《科学革命的结构》的成功是立竿见影的。但是,除了书名中提到的“革命”之外,他的主要概念是“范式”,这是支配特定社区科学实践的一系列概念。尽管库恩的方案得到了广泛的接受,但它并没有受到批评的支持,也没有受到支持该方案的学者的批评。因此,即使他放弃将其用于量子的研究,他一生都不得不多次对其进行重新评估,尽管从未停止认为它是有效的。在这项工作中,他反对以前的历史学家在1900-01年确定的量子革命,这种革命是玻尔兹曼的古典概念和普朗克数学之间的一种连续性。关于库恩的史学思想的争论广泛而丰富,涉及的知识分子也很多。实际上,他利用这些刺激来更好地定义自己的系统。在他生命的尽头,为了给他的原始方案画一个最终的版本,他回过头来考虑科学史和SSR中已经引入的生物进化论之间的平行性。本文旨在分析这些库恩关于科学史方法论的建议。我们将提供一个解释框架,将他不同的史学建议与特定的科学理论联系起来;分别是牛顿力学,热力学和达尔文进化论。换句话说,我们想表明库恩总是利用与特定科学理论基本概念相对应的历史类别。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号