Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 3

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  RUSSO LUCIO
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1
Content available remote

Revolution or Rebirth? Comments on 'The Forgotten Revolution' by Lucio Russo

100%
Krol Z.
Zagadnienia Naukoznawstwa
|
2007
|
vol. 43
|
issue 2
273-285
EN
This article presents some basic facts concerning ancient Greek mathematics which contradict many theses of 'The Forgotten Revolution: How Science Was Born in 300 BC and Why It Had To Be Reborn'. The disastrous and distorting negation of existence of early Greek mathematics and its scientific achievements is commonly accepted in some related studies, e.g. on the Pythagoreans. The argument concerns also some problems in modern science and mathematics.
2
Content available remote

Whether Alexandrian Scholar is a Scientists?

100%
Sady W.
Zagadnienia Naukoznawstwa
|
2007
|
vol. 43
|
issue 2(172)
293-302
EN
Russo claims that our picture of the so called Alexandrian science is wrong. In the 3rd and 2nd century B.C. in Alexandria scientific researches in contemporary meaning of the word were conducted, but almost all books written by hellenistic scientists were lost. The received picture is shaped by books written in the period of Roman Empire by creativeless commentators. In author's opinion Russo's claim is not suitably justified. He applies his own demarcation criterion: what decides of the scientific character of a cognitive enterprise is the systematicity of theoretical investigation and of experimental researches. The appraisal he is arriving at is that in the 3rd and 2nd century B.C. ideas of great (scientific) potential were created but they were not applied in the systematic way because social conditions were not propitious enough.
3
Content available remote

Polemics with Lucio Russo

100%
Kosciuszko K.
Zagadnienia Naukoznawstwa
|
2007
|
vol. 43
|
issue 2(172)
287-292
EN
The author evaluates Russo's ideas from postmodernist position. Contrary to L. Russo, who emphasizes the continuity and the commensurability in the history of science, he suggests that one should stress also discontinuity and incommensurability. Russo loses what is new and different in relation to Hellenistic science. He interprets the history of science as a repetition of the same Hellenistic paradigm. In his work, there is no emergence of novelty. From the other side, criticizing his exaggeratedly formalistic point of view, the author refers to the arguments of Heyting, Brouwer and I. Lakatos.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.