The main object of this paper is to present the investigations that have been made during recent years in OBI on the problems of the science-faith relationships. The methodology of this investigation is described, and some of the most important results mentioned.
The article deals with a concept which was proposed by Michael Heller, who argues that a new theological discipline should be created to deal with sciences and their results. The primary taks of the theology of science – it is the name of this new discipline – is to theologically analyze the fact of the existence of science and its results. The very idea of the theology of science is presented in the first part of the paper, then some issues that may interest this discipline are discussed. Special attention is paid to the problematics of creation, and to some strictly scientific issues that are directly related to this topic (e.g. the beginning of the universe, the evolution of life, the rationality of the world, the antropic principle, the existence of other intelligent beings in the universe).
PL
Tematyka artykułu oscyluje wokół koncepcji teologii nauki zaproponowanej przez Michała Hellera. W ujęciu tego autora teologia nauki ma być nową dyscypliną teologiczną, która uczyni przedmiotem swoich analiz fakt istnienia nauk – w szczególności nauk przyrodniczych – oraz uzyskiwane w tych naukach wyniki. W pierwszej części artykułu omówiona zostanie sama idea teologii nauki. W zamyśle Hellera dyscyplina ta ma spoglądać na nauki przez pryzmat teologicznej prawdy o stworzeniu świata przez Boga. Problematyka stworzenia staje się w tym ujęciu punktem odniesienia dla analiz poświęconych teoriom naukowym, które mówią o początku świata i o ewolucyjnym początku życia biologicznego. Te i tym podobne zagadnienia, które mogą być przedmiotem zainteresowania teologii nauki, zostaną krótko omówione w dalszej części artykułu.
In this paper we discuss the idea of theology of science, which is understood as a new branch of the- ology concerned with the problems arising in the context of natural sciences. Theology of science has been developed since 1980s. The authors of this concept are Michał Heller and Józef Życiński – philosophers involved in discussions between science and religion, who tried to find a new common area to develop this dialogue. The aim of the paper is to present the concept of theology of science in the historical and problematic perspective, taking into account the various challenges and research perspectives faced by this concept.
In this article I analyze the philosophical relationship between traditional philosophy of ema-nation and the modern theories of creation of the world, particularly the theory of the Big Bang. I undertake a preliminary reflection on the terms of renewal emanationism today.
This essay attempts at finding the essential connection between theory of discourse and the Michał Heller’s writing strategy. Some fundamental concepts of Michael Foucault become very stimulative in light of Heller’s vision of connecting disciplines (physics/cosmology, theology/religion, philosophy). The aim of this article is also to reveal the problems of using narrow meanings of some concepts (especially “institution”, “authority”).
The Resurrection of Christ is one of the fundamental dogmas of the Christian faith. Can this event be considered as a scientific fact? This article attempts to answer this question. In this work will be presented popular apology of Josh McDowell which states the opportunity to prove this fact. The different opinion will be shown in ideas of Michael Heller, which speaks of God’s action in the world without compromising methodological naturalism in science.
PL
Zmartwychwstanie Jezusa Chrystusa jest jednym z fundamentalnych dogmatów wiary chrześcijańskiej. Czy to wydarzenie może zostać uznane za fakt naukowy? Celem artykułu jest próba odpowiedzi na to pytanie. W pracy tej zostanie przedstawiona apologia popularna Josha McDowella, która stwierdza możliwość udowodnienia tego faktu. Zdanie odmienne zostanie ukazane w poglądach Hellera, który mówi o działaniu Boga w świecie bez naruszania naturalizmu metodologicznego w nauce.
Zdrowy rozsądek jest zdolnością wspólną dla wszystkich ludzi i jest związany z właściwymi sądami opartymi na poprawnym poznaniu. Te elementy są również bardzo ważne w nauce, więc zdrowy rozsądek może być uniwersalną metodą dialogu pomiędzy różnymi dyscyplinami. Krytyczny racjonalizm Karla Poppera jako metoda weryfikacji teorii jest refleksją nad ludzkim poznaniem, sposobem poznawania prawdy i obiektywnym osądzaniem. Polski filozof Michał Heller wskazuje kilka cech charakteru, które są konieczne, by być dobrym naukowcem lub filozofem i które są wspólne z ideą Poppera: samokrytycyzm, obiektywizm, dyscyplina w myśleniu itd. Celem tego artykułu jest pokazanie, że krytyczny racjonalizm Hellera jest zdroworozsądkowym sposobem uprawiania nauki i filozofii.
EN
Common sense is an ability common to all people and it is related to right judges based on correct perception. These elements are very important in science too, so common sense could be a universal method of dialog among different disciplines. Critical rationalism of Karl Popper, as a method of verification theories, is a reflection about human perception, it is the way to know the truth and it is objective judging. Polish philosopher Michał Heller points out a characteristics which are necessary to be a good scientist and philosopher: self‑criticism, objectivism, and discipline in thinking etc., which are common with Popper’s idea. The aim of this article is to show that Heller’s critical rationalism is commonsensical way of practicing science and philosophy.
Perceiving objects in a structural or relational way in the ontology of physics and mathematics, as opposed to the classical way, shows how the concept of structure remains crucial for contemporary philosophy of physics and philosophy of science. In this paper, a particular emphasis is placed on certain philosophical concepts proposed by Michał Heller, concerning the context of the structural understanding of theories and the world. The first aim is to provide a general critical survey of the main assumptions of structural realism (SR). The second aim is to interpret Heller’s philosophy of structure in accordance with the principal tenets of SR, illuminating certain criticisms of Heller’s approach. Having analyzed Heller’s approach, a question arises concerning the type of dependence on structuralism in the philosophy of physics and the philosophy of mathematics, in addition to certain metaphysical assumptions regarding the concept of structure. It is argued that Heller’s SR conflates the adoption of mathematical structures in theories (the case of the realism–anti-realism debate) with the debate on mathematical explanations and the explanatory role of mathematical constraints.
The article is a review of Kamil Trombik’s book, in which he presents particular concepts of the philosophy of nature at the Pontifical Academy of Theology in Kraków in the years 1978 to 1993. It was the first and decisive period in the formation of the Faculty of Philosophy at the Academy. The goal of the monograph was to demonstrate the factors that contributed to philosophy of nature becoming one of the most prominent and representative trends in this academic center, as well as to attempt to answer the question of why “philosophy in science,” developed initially by Michał Heller and Józef Życiski, became the main style of doing philosophy of nature there. In the reporting part of the review main problems that the author raises are presented. They are collected in three chapters of his work, which corresponds to three initial phases of the formation of the philosophical department at the Pontifical Academy of Theology. Then, in the critical part, some aspects of Trombik’s work are assessed. First of all, the attention is paid to the part concerning the determination of the sources of “philosophy in science” which-although it seems to be the most interesting-is also the least original part of the work. Next, the contribution of Karol Wojtyła and many other lesser-known scientists and philosophers to the formation of an interdisciplinary atmosphere and the promotion of “philosophy in science” in the structures of The Pontifical Academy of Theology and the Krakow intellectual milieu is also appreciated. Many hypotheses and research perspectives in Trombik’s book are highlighted in the review, demonstrating the importance of this Krakow research center (Philosophy Department at the Pontifical Academy of Theology) for the history of Polish science and philosophy.
The Center of Interdisciplinary Studies in Cracow has a very rich tradition that has been studied by many and recently by Kamil Trombik. The very difficult period for the Church and for philosophy during the materialistic Marxist ideology was an opportunity for card. K. Wojtyła to outline a new mode of dialog between science and religion. The future Center, organized by Michał Heller and Józef Życiński not only captured this idea but transformed it into an academic institution centered on the idea of philosophy in science, which was also developed at the Vatican Observatory by W.G. Stoeger et al. Trombik’s book is an excellent study of the historical context and initial years of activity of the Center and its development.
This paper discusses the concept of information formulated by Michael (Michał) Heller. Heller-a philosopher, theoretical physicist, cosmologist, and theologian-provided a complex image of information and its role in nature, which is rarely found in studies of information. Heller posited that the laws of nature may be interpreted as information, or as providing information, presenting this as a complementary view to scientific structuralism (not discussed in this paper). According to Heller, the informational content of a structure in nature is inversely proportional to that structure’s degree of freedom. The more constrained or complex a structure is, and the less likely it is to exist, the more information it contains. In Heller’s view, the concept of information in Shannon’s Theory of Communication (ToC) is inadequate for expressing the notion of information beyond a numerical measure of a signal structure. Information in Heller’s research closely aligns with the concepts of Jacquette’s and Perzanowski’s combinatorial ontology (concepts not discussed in this paper) and the general theory of information (GTI) of Mark Burgin, although Heller did not explicitly make these connections.
The paper presents a brief outline of Michał Heller’s programme of theology of science, with specific attention to its collocation and critical role with respect to both theology and science. The former consideration is based on a third domain of truths (Hans Urs von Balthasar), while the latter is inspired by Józef Tischner’s presentation of religious thinking. Theology of science as such will be described with reference to Larry Laudan’s approach, considered here as a very useful and pragmatic tool for the description of basic concepts of this theology.
The paper concerns the origin and early stage of development of the Center for Interdisciplinary Studies at the Pontifical Academy of Theology in Kraków. Center for Interdisciplinary Studies was founded by Michał Heller and Józef Życiński in the late 1970s. It was an informal institution which focused on conducting scientific activity in the area of philosophy of nature, relationship between mathematical & natural sciences and philosophy, history of science, as well as relationships between science and religion. In this paper I would like to present how this institution developed, I will discuss various forms of its activity and discuss-very generally-what kind of philosophy was promoted by M. Heller, J. Życiński as well as their pupils and close associates. An important part of the paper will also concern the Center for Interdisciplinary Studies as a unique institution, which has developed-in difficult historical period in Poland-philosophical research in the spirit of freedom and respect for the new achievements of science, and also promoted interdisciplinary dialogue between scientists and philosophers.
We set several aims for this paper: first, we wanted to attempt to show that from the perspective of historical and philosophical research, it is legitimate to accept the thesis for the existence of the Kraków School of Philosophy in Science, which was rooted in the activities of Michał Heller and Józef Życiński. We also wanted to make a comparative analysis of the basic specific determinants of the Lvov-Warsaw School (as a model for a philosophical school) and their correspondence in the Kraków School. Further, we wished to show how the Kraków School of Philosophy in Science is actually an adaptation of Kazimierz Twardowski’s model, of course taking into account the differences between them. Finally, we wanted to illustrate the nature of the philosophy in the Kraków School and discuss the current efforts to develop it further.
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.