The analytical notions of ‘thought style’, ‘paradigm’, ‘episteme’ and ‘style of reasoning’ are some of the most popular frameworks in the history and philosophy of science. Although their proponents, Ludwik Fleck, Thomas Kuhn, Michel Foucault, and Ian Hacking, are all part of the same philosophical tradition that closely connects history and philosophy, the extent to which they share similar assumptions and objectives is still under debate. In the first part of the paper, I shall argue that, despite the fact that these four thinkers disagree on certain assumptions, their frameworks have the same explanatory goal – to understand how objectivity is possible. I shall present this goal as a necessary element of a common project -- that of historicising Kant's a priori. In the second part of the paper, I shall make an instrumental use of the insights of these four thinkers to form a new model for studying objectivity. I shall also propose a layered diagram that allows the differences between the frameworks to be mapped, while acknowledging their similarities. This diagram will show that the frameworks of style of reasoning and episteme illuminate conditions of possibility that lie at a deeper level than those considered by thought styles and paradigms.
...More
Article
George Borg;
(2020)
On 'the application of science to science itself:' Chemistry, instruments, and the scientific labor process
(/isis/citation/CBB166777080/)
Chapter
Zittel, Claus;
(2010)
The Politics of Cognition: Genesis and Development of Ludwik Fleck's “Comparative Epistemology”
(/isis/citation/CBB001023239/)
Thesis
Hedfors, Eva;
(2006)
Reading Fleck: Questions on Philosophy and Science
(/isis/citation/CBB001560981/)
Article
Shaul Bar-Haim;
(2020)
Proving Nothing and Illustrating Much: The Case of Michael Balint
(/isis/citation/CBB689739909/)
Chapter
Uus, Undo;
(2001)
The Glory and Misery of Modern Science
(/isis/citation/CBB000102685/)
Book
Machan, Tibor R.;
(2004)
Objectivity: Recovering Determinate Reality in Philosophy, Science, and Everyday Life
(/isis/citation/CBB000630290/)
Article
Walker, David;
(2012)
A Kuhnian Defence of Inference to the Best Explanation
(/isis/citation/CBB001230571/)
Thesis
Rolloff, Sylvia Alexis;
(2010)
Explanatory Models in Behavioral Endocrinology
(/isis/citation/CBB001562758/)
Article
Toader, Iulian D.;
(2013)
Concept Formation and Scientific Objectivity: Weyl's Turn against Husserl
(/isis/citation/CBB001320797/)
Book
Rosen, Jo;
(2010)
Lawless Universe: Science and the Hunt for Reality
(/isis/citation/CBB001031332/)
Book
Parsons, Keith M.;
(2014)
It Started with Copernicus: Vital Questions about Science
(/isis/citation/CBB001510107/)
Thesis
Brister, Evelyn Louise;
(2002)
Scientific Objectivity and Scientific Objectives
(/isis/citation/CBB001562514/)
Book
Mansoor Niaz;
(2019)
Evolving Nature of Objectivity in the History of Science and its Implications for Science Education
(/isis/citation/CBB181627786/)
Chapter
Carrier, Martin;
(2003)
Smooth Lines in Confirmation Theory: Carnap, Hempel, and the Moderns
(/isis/citation/CBB001213687/)
Article
Caneva, Kenneth L.;
(2000)
Possible Kuhns in the history of science: Anomalies of incommensurable paradigms
(/isis/citation/CBB000110755/)
Article
Luis Fernández Moreno;
Paula Atencia Conde-Pumpido;
(2021)
Kuhn, Putnam and the Reference
(/isis/citation/CBB979754022/)
Article
Uebel, Thomas;
(2011)
Carnap and Kuhn: On the Relation between the Logic of Science and the History of Science
(/isis/citation/CBB001230055/)
Book
Bojana Mladenović;
(2017)
Kuhn's Legacy: Epistemology, Metaphilosophy, and Pragmatism
(/isis/citation/CBB010134158/)
Book
Thomas S. Kuhn;
Bojana Mladenovic;
(2022)
The Last Writings of Thomas S. Kuhn: Incommensurability in Science
(/isis/citation/CBB418530960/)
Book
K. Brad Wray;
(2021)
Interpreting Kuhn: Critical Essays
(/isis/citation/CBB103514339/)
Be the first to comment!