A. WHITEHEAD'S METAPHYSICAL ONTOLOGY AND I. PRIGOGINE'S SCIENTIFIC ONTOLOGY: FROM A POINT OF VIEW OF A THEORETICAL CONCEPTION OF SCIENCE.
Whitehead's and Prigogine's philosophies of science are similar in this respect that they both are interested in ontology built in the light of modern science. This kind of ontological approach, especially Whitehead's metaphysical reasoning is usually regarded as speculative which should be avoided...
| Publicado en: | Problems / Problemos Vol. 71; pp. 78 - 91 |
|---|---|
| Autor principal: | |
| Formato: | Artículo |
| Publicado: |
Vilnius University
2007
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=27520708&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: hlh uiTerm: 27520708 longDbName: Humanities International Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: jinfo: jid: 13921126 3D4C jtl: Problems / Problemos issn: 13921126 maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: 2007 vid: 71 pid: 16037 pub: Vilnius University artinfo: ui: 27520708 ppf: 78 ppct: 13 formats: fmt: @attributes: type: P size: 271KB tig: atl: A. WHITEHEAD'S METAPHYSICAL ONTOLOGY AND I. PRIGOGINE'S SCIENTIFIC ONTOLOGY: FROM A POINT OF VIEW OF A THEORETICAL CONCEPTION OF SCIENCE. aug: au: Vihalemm, Rein affil: University of Tartu, Department of Philosophy, Ülikooli 18 (visiting: Lossi 3), 50090 Tartu, Estonia su: Philosophy of science Philosophy Philosophy & science Ontology Philosophers Chemistry sug: subj: Philosophy of science Philosophy Philosophy & science Ontology Philosophers Chemistry keyword: non-classical science philosophy of chemistry Prigogine's scientific ontology theoretical model of science Whitehead's metaphysical ontology chemijos filosofija ne-klasikinis mokslas Prigogine'o mokslinė ontologija teorinis mokslo modelis Whiteheado metafizinė ontologija ab: Whitehead's and Prigogine's philosophies of science are similar in this respect that they both are interested in ontology built in the light of modern science. This kind of ontological approach, especially Whitehead's metaphysical reasoning is usually regarded as speculative which should be avoided in philosophy of science. Ilya Prigogine and Isabelle Stengers appreciated, however, Whitehead's metaphysics as cosmology in that being the most ambitious attempt to elaborate a philosophy of nature that, although speculative, is not directed against science or towards separation of philosophy from the actual science. Although Whitehead criticized the classical science, he did not identify it with science in general and did not acknowledge the respective domains and tasks of science and philosophy as distinct of principle from each other. According to Prigogine and Stengers Whitehead's philosophy was somewhat the forerunner of Prigogine's non-classical science which gives a new content to the speculations of Whitehead. Chemistry was a starting point of Prigogine's non-classical physical theory. In the present paper Prigogine's conception of non-classical science is examined from the point of view of a theoretical conception of science elaborated in the context of philosophy of chemistry. Prigogine and Stengers, as well as Whitehead, have not really presented a theoretical conception of science. It is argued that the latter, however, offers a key for examining various issues in philosophy of science and understanding science in general, including Prigogine's non-classical science. Appreciating Prigogine's optimism concerning the chances of science that has liberated itself from the myth, the author still finds that this optimism can also be misleading as it can create a false impression that this new science does not deal with idealizations any more, that it is not a means of inquiry resulting from special requirements and aims, but will really understand the world "as it is" to the point that the problems of so called human world, including those of, e.g., ethics would be, in principle, scientifically understandable. In fact, however, if non-classical science manages rid itself from the myth of classical science, the only change will be that it does not equate the scientific picture of world and scientifically modelled reality with the real world "as it is". Whiteheado ir Prigogine'o mokslo filosofines koncepcijas jungia tai, kad juos abu domina ontologija, grindžiama modernaus mokslo duomenimis. Mokslo filosofija ontologinį požiūrį, ypač tokį kaip Whiteheado metafizinis mąstymas, paprastai laiko spekuliatyviu, todėl vengtinu. Tačiau Ilya Prigogine'as ir Isabelle Stengers į Whiteheado metafiziką žvelgė kaip į kosmologiją ir vertino ją už tai, kad, būdama ambicingiausias, tegu spekuliatyvus, gamtos filosofijos projektas, ji vis dėlto nėra nei nukreipta prieš mokslą, nei siekia supriešinti filosofiją ir dabarties mokslą. Whiteheadas kritikavo klasikinį mokslą, tačiau netapatino jo su mokslu bendrąja prasme ir tyrimo sričių bei siekiamų tikslų požiūriu nepripažino principinio skirtumo tarp mokslo ir filosofijos. Pasak Prigogine'o ir Stengers, Whiteheado filosofija turėtų būti vertinama kaip Prigogine'o ne-klasikinio mokslo pirmtakė. Toks požiūris suteikia naują turinį Whiteheado spekuliacijoms. Prigogine'o ne-klasikinės fizikos koncepcijos atspirties taškas yra chemija. Šiame straipsnyje Prigogine'o koncepcija nagrinėjama chemijos filosofijos siūlomos teorinės mokslo sampratos požiūriu. Iš tikrųjų nei Prigogine'as ir Stengers, nei Whiteheadas nepateikė teorinės mokslo koncepcijos. Tačiau straipsnyje teigiama, kad būtent teorinė mokslo samprata duoda raktą, padedantį atrakinti ne vieną mokslo filosofijos, mokslo bendrąja prasme, taip pat ir Prigogine'o ne-klasikinio mokslo keliamą klausimą. Autorius simpatizuoja Prigogine'o optimizmui, kad mokslas išsilaisvino iš mito, tačiau, autoriaus požiūriu, šis optimizmas visgi klaidina. Gali susidaryti įspūdis, kad ne-klasikinis mokslas neturi nieko bendra su idealizacijomis, kad jis nėra vien tyrimo būdas, priklausantis nuo konkrečių reikalavimų ir tikslų, kad naujasis mokslas iš tikrųjų supras pasaulį „tokį, koks jis yra", kad net vadinamojo žmogaus pasaulio problemos (pvz., etikos) taps iš principo moksliškai suprantamos. Tačiau jei ne-klasikinis mokslas gebėtų atsikratyti klasikinio mokslo mito, tai vienintelė skirtybė būtų ta, kad jis netapatintų mokslinio pasaulio vaizdo ir moksliškai sumodeliuotos realybės su pasauliu, „koks jis yra" iš tikrųjų. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Article src: R language: English refInfo: copyright: @attributes: flag: Y custom: Copyright of Problems / Problemos is the property of Vilnius University and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. item: Problems / Problemos holder: Vilnius University dt: @attributes: year: 2007 holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|