Search results

1

Vědecký status darwinismu

100%

Havlík V.

Filosofický časopis (Philosophical Journal)

|

2009

|

vol. 57

|

issue 6

837-853

EN

The philosophical attempt to explain the scientific status of Darwinism has been given significant attention in the methodology of science. Darwinism, unlike the physical theories which act as the model of what is scientific, does not meet the usual mathematical-experimental requirements and, due to this exceptional character, raises the philosophical question of how we might either reformulate the what it means for theories to be scientific or deny the scientific status of Darwinism. The aim of this paper is review some of discussions of this question in the philosophy of science, to find an acceptable and defensible position in the spectrum of opinion, and to assess the future perspective for this evolutionary process of philosophical reflection. This paper endeavours to show, on the basis of a critique of M. Ruse, that Darwin’s theory, the core of Darwinism, is fully axiomisable and that, as such, it fits the traditional hypothetico-deductive model of scientific theories. At the same time, however, we show the reason why it has a scientific character that is exceptional and specific – we point here to the much more complex and multi-levelled theoretical synthesis of Darwinism, which is unparalleled in contemporary natural science. It is for this reason that it difficult to find methodological standards for the estimation of the scientificality of Darwinism in philosophico-methodological reflection.

2

Znaczenie studium przypadku jako metody badawczej w naukach o zarządzaniu

100%

Wójcik P.

e-mentor

|

2013

|

issue 1 (48)

17-22

EN

Despite extreme popularity of the case study method, it is also criticized, mainly for the lack of solid methodological basis for the generalization purpose. According to the author, such a stance may result from inaccuracy in distinguishing research aims as well as from the lack of knowledge. In fact, case study method constitutes a very valuable mean of finding solutions not only for scientific but also for practical problems. This paper’s purpose is to systematize the knowledge in the area of the case study method, identify its place in the methodology of science, explain inaccuracy of its understanding and assess its usefulness in research.

3

Od konfliktu do integracji. Historia i teologiczne uzasadnienie metodologicznej odrębności poznania wiary i rozumu

89%

Chyłka B.

Semina Scientiarum

|

2017

|

vol. 16

EN

The history of relationship between faith and reason is marked by four modelsof the interaction between science and theology proposed by Ian G. Barbour:conflict, independence, dialogue and integration. Even if nineteenth-centurypositivism is still present in many scientists’ minds, philosophy of science eventuallymanaged to overcome it in the 1960s. A mutual distrust between faithand reason started to disappear. In this context Fr. Michał Heller presenteda project of a new discipline – the theology of science which would look at theboundaries of the natural sciences from the theological point of view. According to Fr. Wojciech Giertych the adequate model of relationship between faith andreason can be based theologically on Chalcedonian Christology of Jesus’ twonatures. Since reason and faith come together unconfusedly and inseparably ina human being, a mutual dialogue and even integration between theology andscience is by all means possible.

4

Teplov as a popularizer of philosophy

88%

Drozdek A.

IDEA. Studia nad strukturą i rozwojem pojęć filozoficznych

|

2015

|

vol. 27

319-334

EN

In 1751, Grigorii Teplov published his book that he considered to be an introduction to philosophy for the uninitiated. In the first part, Teplov introduced the reader to the subject of philosophy; however, Teplov concentrated on philosophy and methodology of science, thereby presenting a rather limited view of philosophy. In the second part, he presented the history of philosophy showing how inadequate his knowledge of the subject was. In the third part, he discussed some ontological and epistemological problems when in his presentation of several philosophical concepts basing his presentation largely on Wolff.

5

Czy fizyczne teorie efektywne są wiarygodną strategią osiągnięcia teorii finalnej?

76%

Szydłowski M., Tambor P.

Zagadnienia Filozoficzne w Nauce

|

2020

|

issue 68

79-116

PL

The paper presents the methodology of effective theories as a strategy used in the process of development of modern physics to reach a final theory. We present the definition and characteristic features of an effective theory, as well as the answer to the question of whether and what kind of scenario of reaching a final theory is realized by contemporary physics. We argue that the process of development of physics in the direction of a final theory is potentially final, i.e. expressible in the conceptual schema of effective theories and as such it is convergent to a final theory. In each effective theory there are physical constants, however, whose status differs from logical constants. They have a dimension (length, energy, etc.) and are used to compare physical quantities. The structure of relevant effective theory can be interpreted in the epistemological framework of approximated truth theory. In the case study of cosmological models, the sequence of models is convergent to potentially true model. The Standard Cosmological Model is the theory of the structure and dynamics of the Universe.

6

Contemporary thinking about theory building: a review of the concept with application to organisational politics researching

75%

Bratnicka-Myśliwiec K., Kulikowska-Pawlak M., Bratnicki M.

Organizacja i Zarządzanie : kwartalnik naukowy

|

2018

|

vol. nr 2

5--18

EN

This article contributes to the rapidly growing body of literature regarding general good theory building practices with regard to organisational politics. The results of the review revealed and highlighted five core components of contemporary thinking about theory building: constrained comprehending, conjunctive theorising, theorising styles, pragmatic-empirical approach, and science-practice gap. Tying together those insights, the authors have developed a framework to distinguish a specific set of recommendations which clarify and organise theoretical foundations of organisational politics researching: cooperation of academics and managers, requisite complexity, contextualisation, versatility, and process perspective. In the authors' opinion, this provides a substantial opportunity for theoretical advancement through a careful methodological application.

7

Bezradnost metodologie kosmologie?

75%

Havlík V.

Filosofický časopis (Philosophical Journal)

|

2015

|

vol. 63

|

issue 2

247-266

EN

This paper deals with the testing capabilities of the modern methodology of science in the specific problem area of cosmology. I propose to monitor the responses of selected competing methodologies (Kuhn, Lakatos) on two questions: 1) To what extent are modern methodologies able to cope with the problem area as a descriptive task? and 2) to what extent are modern methodologies able to cope with the problem area as a prescriptive task? In both cases it appears that the tested methodologies find themselves in a quandary when trying to submit answers. The conclusion of the article attempts to show that this quandary remains, in a certain form. However, this does not mean that methodology should give up its fundamental role, ie. the role of being a heuristics in achieving knowledge

8

Worldmaking as an approach to scientific pluralism

63%

Fišerová N.

Teorie vědy (Theory of Science)

|

2021

|

vol. 43

|

issue 2

219-246

EN

This study discusses the extent to which Goodman’s constructivist conception of worldmaking may serve the needs of scientific practice. I argue that worldmaking should help us retain a common methodological order and a basic framework for scientific pluralism. In this way it should provide us not only with better scientific knowledge but also with a greater understanding of the world in general that would be inclusive of both scientific and nonscientific disciplines. The main purpose of this paper is to show that, if revisited, Goodman’s idea of versions, including even mutually exclusive scientific theories, can aid the gradual progress of pluralistic science. Taking the prevailing criticism of Goodman’s conception into account, I argue that worldmaking can serve as a methodological apparatus for scientific disciplines because it presents a position of moderated constructivism which, thanks to the variable criterion of rightness, offers a way to maintain both relativism and skepticism.

CS

Studie se zaměřuje na aplikovatelnost Goodmanovy konstruktivistické koncepce světatvorby pro potřeby vědecké praxe. Světatvorba, jakožto metodologický aparát, by měla sloužit k posílení vědeckého pluralismu a měla by vědám (i nevědám) poskytnout metodologický řád a strukturu. Tímto způsobem bychom měli dosáhnout nejen přesnějšího vědeckého popisu, ale i hlubšího všeobecného porozumění světu, které zahrnuje jak vědecké, tak i nevědecké disciplíny. Hlavním cílem studie je poukázat na to, že Goodmanova teorie verzí světa, která zahrnuje i vzájemně neslučitelné vědecké teorie, může podpořit pokrok pluralisticky pojaté vědy, je-li interpretovaná v umírněné formě. Po zhodnocení stávající kritiky a vypořádání se s námitkami, může světatvorba sloužit jako metodologický aparát pro vědecké disciplíny, protože díky pozici umírněného konstruktivismu poskytuje prostor vědeckému pluralismu, přičemž zabraňuje relativismu i skepticismu.

9

Popperův flirt s dogmatismem

63%

Parusniková Z.

Teorie vědy (Theory of Science)

|

2019

|

vol. 41

|

issue 2

179-199

EN

At various occasions Popper states that in order for a theory to show its strength “certain amount” of dogmatism must precede the critical testing phase. He even argues that dogmatism is a necessary precondition of criticism. Th ese are alarming statements, undermining Popper’s methodological imperative of falsifi - cation. Critical rationalism is based on a strict opposition to dogmatism for logical reasons (justifi cation is impossible), for evolutionary reasons (justifi cation blocks the growth of knowledge), and for ideological reasons (dogmatism encourages totalitarianism). Popper cannot provide any objective criterion defi ning the proper dosage of dogmatism and thus opens doors to its uncontrolled expansion. Criticism thus ceases to be the non-negotiable normative principle and the inviolable standard of rationality.

CS

Popper opakovaně tvrdí, že aby teorie mohla rozvinout svůj plný potenciál, musí kritické fázi testování předcházet krátká dogmatická fáze. Někdy zachází Popper ještě dál a uznává dokonce nezbytnost dogmatismu pro rozvinutí kritického myšlení. To jsou znepokojivá tvrzení, která podrývají Popperův metodologický princip falsifi kace. Kritický racionalismus je založen na nesmiřitelném postoji k dogmatismu z logických důvodů (justifi kace je logicky neplatná), z evolučních důvodů (dogmatismus nepřispívá k růstu vědění) i z ideologických důvodů (dogmatismus je typický pro totalitární režimy). Popper není schopen defi novat žádné objektivní měřítko, jak by se měl dogmatismus správně dávkovat, a tak otvírá prostor pro jeho nekontrolovatelné šíření. Kritičnost tak přestává být nekompromisním normativním principem a konstitutivním rysem racionality.

10

Logika. Panorama tematyki

51%

Kublikowski R.

Teologiczne Studia Siedleckie

|

2018

|

issue XV/15

314-341

EN

Summary Logic. Panorama of the Domain In European culture logic – understood as a scientifc discipline and skill – has been developed and taught at least since Aristotle’s time, namely since the 4th century B.C. The aim of this text is to answer the question: what is logic? It shows an analytic panorama of logic. Logic – understood in a broad sense – can be divided into formal logic, semiotics, methodology of science and epistemology (Chapter 1). An additional goal of the text is to give a historical note concerning those lecturers who taught logic in the Major Seminary of Siedlce Diocese (Chapter 2). Logic has been developed to analyse, to describe, to make precise and put in order various linguistic and cognitive activities. Logic explicates intersentential and inner-sentential relations, relations between contents and extensions of terms – relations established by various functors. Logic plays all its roles assuming that precision is better than a lack thereof.

11

Metodologia nauk – dzisiaj i jutro

51%

Bremer J.

Zagadnienia Naukoznawstwa

|

2019

|

vol. 55

|

issue 1(219)

EN

The Methodology of Sciences publication (2019) is dedicated to logical, humanistic and philosophical research focusing on the creation of science and on the construction and development of scientific theories. It consists of two parts: What is science? and Types of sciences. In the first, systematic part, the authors present the genesis of modern science and the philosophy of science, emphasizing especially contemporary changes in the understanding of what we call science. In the second part they show the methodological and objective separateness of individual types of sciences (formal, natural, social, cognitive, humanistic as cultural and theological sciences). After a fragmentary presentation of the mentioned parts, I will discuss a contemporary topic that was not included in the publication in question, but which may serve as its supplement. It is about understanding scientific progress in the era of rapidly developing applications of artificial intelligence (AI).

PL

Publikacja Metodologia nauk (2019) jest poświęcona badaniom logicznym, humanistycznym i filozoficznym, skupiającym się na tworzeniu nauki oraz na budowie i rozwoju teorii naukowych. Składa się z dwu części: Czym jest nauka? oraz Typy nauk. W części pierwszej, systematycznej, autorzy przedstawiają genezę nowożytnej nauki i filozofii nauki, akcentując zwłaszcza współczesne zmiany w rozumieniu tego, co nazywamy nauką. W części drugiej pokazują metodologiczną i treściową odrębność poszczególnych typów nauk (nauki formalne, przyrodnicze, społeczne, kognitywistyczne, humanistyczne jako nauki o kulturze oraz teologiczne). Po wycinkowym przedstawieniu wspomnianych części omówię współczesny temat, który nie znalazł się w omawianej publikacji, a który może stanowić jej uzupełnienie. Chodzi o rozumienie postępu naukowego w dobie szybko rozwijających się zastosowań sztucznej inteligencji.

12

Postmodernizm i religia wobec rozumu - uwagi krytyczne na temat ujęcia Gellnera

51%

Kurkowski B.

Filozoficzne Aspekty Genezy

|

2021

|

issue 18

141-160

EN

Religion, reason and postmodernism point to differenttypes of attitude towards the world, above all in respect of epistemic concerns. In his book Postmodernism, Reason and Religion Ernest Gellner presented their salient characteristics, describing himself as a supporter of Enlightenment reason. He thus soughtto show reason in a positive light, presenting it as drawing on whatis best in both religion and postmodernism while rejecting theirproblematic elements. However, he failed to attend to certain features common to religion and postmodernism that at the sametime contradict some of the postulates of Enlightenment rationalism. The present paper considers some selected threads of thistype that occur in the context of language, the methodology of science and selected schools of twentiethcentury psychology. Theanalysis proposed shows that religion shares some nontrivial elements with postmodernism that stand in opposition to reason,while at the same time having some elements in common with reason that are opposed to postmodernism. The perspective thus obtained constitutes an alternative to Gellner’s approach, in whichreason was made to appear as a balanced and moderate positionsituated between the opposite extremes of religion and postmodernism.

PL

Religia, rozum i postmodernizm wskazują na różnego rodzaju postawy wobec świata, przede wszystkim w wymiarze poznawczym. W książce Postmodernizm, rozum i religia Ernest Gellner przedstawił ich charakterystykę, samemu określając się jako zwolennik oświeceniowego rozumu. W związku z tym rozum został przez niego ukazany w jak najlepszym świetle. Zapożycza on to, co dobre z religii i postmodernizmu, oraz odrzuca ich złe elementy. Choć we wstępie Gellner przyznał, że każda para w obrębie tych trzech postaw posiada pewne cechy wspólne, to jednak w dalszej części rozważań traktował postmodernizm i religię jakby stanowiły dwa krańce spektrum, w środku którego jest rozum. Nie poświęcił również uwagi cechom wspólnym religii i postmodernizmu, które jednocześnie są niezgodne z niektórymi postulatami oświeceniowego racjonalizmu. W niniejszej pracy przywołano kilka wybranych tego typu wątków w kontekście języka, metodologii nauk oraz wy-branych szkół psychologii dwudziestego wieku. Za pomocą przeprowadzonej analizy pokazano, że religia posiada istotne cechy wspólne z postmodernizmem, których nie podziela z rozumem, oraz jednocześnie posiada cechy wspólne z rozumem, których nie dzieli z postmodernizmem. Uzyskana w ten sposób perspektywa stanowi kontrpropozycję dla ujęcia Gellnera, w którym racjonalizm miał jawić się jako zbalansowane i umiarkowane stanowisko usytuowane pomiędzy przeciwległymi sobie skrajnościami religii i postmodernizmu.

Refine search results

Vědecký status darwinismu

Znaczenie studium przypadku jako metody badawczej w naukach o zarządzaniu

Od konfliktu do integracji. Historia i teologiczne uzasadnienie metodologicznej odrębności poznania wiary i rozumu

Teplov as a popularizer of philosophy

Czy fizyczne teorie efektywne są wiarygodną strategią osiągnięcia teorii finalnej?

Contemporary thinking about theory building: a review of the concept with application to organisational politics researching

Bezradnost metodologie kosmologie?

Worldmaking as an approach to scientific pluralism

Popperův flirt s dogmatismem

Logika. Panorama tematyki

Metodologia nauk – dzisiaj i jutro

Postmodernizm i religia wobec rozumu - uwagi krytyczne na temat ujęcia Gellnera