Much discussions over what is "science" of late. In the 1880s, Matthew Arnold, poet and educator, and Thomas Huxley, biologist, engaged in a fierce curriculum debate. The issue was whether college curriculums, which at that time focused on classical literature, should be expanded to include the natural sciences. 1959, and the "Two Cultures" lecture by CP Snow highlighted the chasm between spheres of knowledge - the humanities and sciences. The lecture was subsequently published as "The Two Cultures and the Scientific Revolution". The 1996 Sokal Hoax continued to fuel the discussion. Complexity studies, the multidisciplinary study of complex systems, from cells to societies, seem to offer potential for some mediation. How do systems of knowledge affect how we attempt to comprehend the world?
SK Sng’s Post
More Relevant Posts
-
The Human Element Matters’
Director, Humanities, Arts, and Culture Programs at American Academy of Arts & Sciences
A challenging and much-needed argument for the value of the humanities from a historian of science. Highly recommended. https://bit.ly/3vra2D3
-
I'm very pleased to share that one of the core papers of my PhD-dissertation, coauthored with Samuli Reijula, is forthcoming in the British Journal for the Philosophy of Science! We discuss persistent evidential discordance, or the situation where scientists keep getting contrary or contradictory results about a phenomenon for a long time. This is typical in science and in many ways a good thing, but it also makes applying scientific evidence to decision making difficult. We propose that analysing scientific inquiry with the concept enriched lines of evidence is helpful for understanding persistent discordance, and can help work towards resolving it. And finally, it's not all about weird results and evidence, but also about the questions scientists ask and the facts that they are after.
Persistent evidential discordance | The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science: Vol 0, No ja
journals.uchicago.edu
-
We have a series of 8 articles on this topic... Proof the eternity of the existence of life and vital information. Could you introduce me to one of your fellow scientists at the university who would be interested in our research. This proof is a summary of the analysis of the results of scientific research in the fields of information technology, system analysis and biology. The proof is based on the main provisions of the theory of systems under the conditions of supplementing the systems with information functions. This is the basis of this proof. Thanks to this proof, a number of contradictions between the two main philosophical currents: materialism and idealism are eliminated, because not only matter is eternal, but also life with the information necessary for its existence is eternal. Here is one of our publications. https://lnkd.in/eHjpfKhz Prof. Y. Khlaponin
-
Professor bei University of Agder (UiA), Director Centre for Digital Transformation (CeDiT)
I´m not "over the moon", "humbled" or "thrilled to announce" (sorry no LinkedIn-Jargon today) However, I´m a bit proud that I managed to turn a talk on Feyerabend & the Postfactual (held in August in Rome at a room temperature of about 40C) into a little essay for Epistemology and Philosophy of Science. If anyone wants a free copy, you find it here: https://lnkd.in/dDZFnABc
-
-
Enabling meaningful change in Aotearoa and internationally. 💡🌏💚 Sense-maker | writer | people connector
In 1959 Charles Percy Snow, both a scientist and a novelist, gave an address called 'The Two Cultures'. It was about the splitting out of science and the humanities and how this separation process is detrimental to solving global issues (see reference in comments). At at some levels, the division of science from humanities may be pragmatic and helpful. At a broader scale this rather slippery delineation can have bigger societal implications for our understanding of the world and the development of knowledge. I find it helpful to turn to etymology or other languages to think about the origin of the concepts we apply and the usefulness or otherwise of distinction and/or the development of semantic overlaps. Let's have a look at German (because we all know I love German!). 'Wissen' means 'knowledge'. 'Wissenschaft' means 'science' or 'scholarship' 'Naturwissenschaften' means 'science' or 'natural sciences' 'Geisteswissenschaft' means humanities or the arts (with geist meaning 'mind'). Science helps explains some of the world's biggest and smallest mysteries. The humanities help us to understand what these mysteries are and why they matter to us as humans.
-
#Kant and Modern #Scientism: the choices of Science for the discussion of its conditions of #universality by Lucas R Vollet "Kant developed the epistemological questions and answers that complemented the philosophical ideals of the #Enlightenment and the correlated methodological #development of #science. In the present paper, we will explore the thesis that this development is due to a constant trace in Kant's writing: he is always monitoring the possibilities of post-Newtonian science to occupy the ontological vacuum left behind by #metaphysics. Kant's work allows us to judge the claims of Scientism as the philosophical candidacy of modern science to official and normative knowledge and substitute to metaphysics in the construction of a priori knowledge. In this article, we intend to follow the situation of contemporary Scientism, from logical-positivism to Quine's naturalism, and to discuss if Kant's hopes for science as a priori knowledge have been confirmed. We added at the end a dialogue with pragmatism in order to establish the limits of the universality aimed by science and to prevent our culture from the infiltration of irrationalism." ... https://lnkd.in/e3sT2Xru
-
-
"It is a test of true theories not only to account for, but to predict phenomena." 🔍 ~ William Whewell, Aphorisms Concerning Ideas, Science, and the Language of Science, 1840, p. 23 For more content on philosophy and science by me, check out the link below. 🔗📚 #science
-
-
Human Development philosopher/Researcher/Theorist. President The Integrity Organization. Global Peace Ambassador and Peace Advocate (PAP/MP/IPA/PE),South Korea. Citizen of Earth/Honourary Doctorate in Philosophy(Greece)
FLASH BACK OF (2021/09/27) THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN PHILOSOPHY AND SCIENCE Philosophy is questionability of criticality of understandability of rationality and reasonability or perceptive reasonability in a Reminiscencingly-transcendented conception, consummation of thoughtfulness, and finality of understandability, while science is rigorous experimentation of perceptive reasonability to arrive at a Reminiscencingly-transcendented conception, consummation of thoughtfulness, and finality of understandability. ISN-ODP/FMP: Nebeolism-Igweism (2024/09/28)
-
Sociologist: sociology of conflict and politics (Airlangga University) | | Sekjend Asosiasi Program Studi Sosiologi Indonesia (APSSI)
In this article, I choose to define interest. Since Ratzenhover, Marx, Habermas to Swedberg what the serious problem is no single definition of interest. Beside theoretical thought elaborations, I abstracted my 20 years of field research experiences, particularly in conflict studies. please refer to the link below for the article: ttps://https://lnkd.in/gNfMv9JH
-
-
I unravel financial puzzles and translate complex ideas into actionable implementation plans. Talking about #fraud #analysis #socialmarketing #strategy #implementation
Centuries of #marketing the "value" of being "above" the sausage-making of policy and politics has had devastating effects. We've seen it in the #pandemic, with #climatechange, and with every issue that have been #marketed as #culturewars. Intellectual and research standards should always be upheld, but the opposition is taking full advantage of the need to caveat everything. The statistical room for error is being #marketed as 'not the truth'. The war is being fought on different battlefields. The war that engages emotions and seizes on the 1% uncertainty (because we can never be 100% certain about anything) is winning.
We sometimes hear that scientists shouldn’t be political or engage in advocacy or activism, because that might damage our credibility. It’s a widespread academic norm, but where does it come from? According to Medieval historian Amanda Power, it dates from a time when academic activity was the preserve of monks. The monks craved wisdom, and believed that truth could only be found in God. However, in order to receive God’s wisdom, they had to renounce as much as possible of what made them human and imperfect. They had to be empty vessels, completely divorced from the material world and all material interests. But just because an ideal worked for scholarship in Medieval times doesn’t necessarily mean it’s fit for a planetary emergency. As scholars, academics have a lot of thinking to do about how best to use our knowledge to bring about the transformative change we need. But, as Power says “this thinking must be done from first principles, without an unwitting dependence on a set of moralised values that crystallised in the dying days of the Roman Empire.”
-
