首页> 外文OA文献 >Another Parting of the Ways:\ud Intersubjectivity and the Objectivity of Science
【2h】

Another Parting of the Ways:\ud Intersubjectivity and the Objectivity of Science

机译:另辟Part径:\ ud 主体间性与科学的客观性

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Michael Friedman defines the scientific enterprise as an ongoing project with a dynamics of reason that persists through scientific revolutions: The coherence and continuity of science owes to a communicative rationality that is operative at all times. It assures us of our shared objective world by transforming subjective points of view into intersubjectively binding agreements. Though it takes a very broad approach epistemologically, this conception of science may yet be too narrow in respect to notions of objectivity. It excludes a prominent mode of knowledge production that might be called technoscientific. This exclusion becomes particularly evident in Friedman’s discussion of Heidegger as a critic of Cassirer and Carnap and as a critic of objectivity as “universal validity” of scientific propositions. If one tends to Heidegger’s own account of objectivity, one encounters a non-propositional notion of truth. Science is seen as a technology that brings forth phenomena and processes. Accordingly, even where modern physics appears to be concerned primarily with the formulation of theories and the testing of hypotheses, it uses mathematical and representational techniques to conceive and create the modern world. And more powerfully than intersubjective agreement, technologies assure us of the unity and objectivity of our simultaneously social as well as natural world. – There may be good reasons to hold fast to the close affiliation of communicative rationality, science, and enlightenment. However, to the extent that it turns a blind eye to technoscientific knowledge production and the technological character of science, a philosophy of technoscience needs to develop an alternative perspective on questions of objectivity, explanation, inference, or validation.
机译:迈克尔·弗里德曼(Michael Friedman)将科学事业定义为一个正在进行的项目,它具有通过科学革命而得以持续的理性动力:科学的连贯性和连续性归因于始终有效的交流理性。通过将主观观点转变为主体间具有约束力的协议,它确保了我们共同的客观世界。尽管在认识论上采取了非常广泛的方法,但是关于客观性的概念,这种科学概念可能还太狭窄。它排除了可以称为技术科学的知识生产的显着模式。在弗里德曼(Friedman)关于海德格尔(Heidegger)作为卡西尔(Cassirer)和卡尔纳普(Carnap)的批评家以及客观性作为科学命题的“普遍有效性”的批评家的讨论中,这种排斥尤其明显。如果人们倾向于海德格尔自己对客观性的解释,那么就会遇到一种非命题的真理概念。科学被视为带来现象和过程的技术。因此,即使在现代物理学似乎主要与理论的形成和假设检验有关的地方,它也使用数学和表示技术来构想和创造现代世界。比主体间协议更强大的是,技术可以确保我们同时存在的社会世界和自然世界的统一性和客观性。 –可能有充分的理由坚持沟通理性,科学和启蒙的紧密联系。但是,在某种程度上,它对技术科学知识的产生和科学的技术特性视而不见,因此,技术科学哲学需要就客观性,解释性,推理性或验证性问题提出另一种观点。

著录项

  • 作者

    Nordmann, Alfred;

  • 作者单位
  • 年度 2012
  • 总页数
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 en
  • 中图分类

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

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