On the Neo-Empiricist Thesis and Historicity of Science: Enriques and Neurath

IF 0.9 4区 哲学 Q2 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE Foundations of Science Pub Date : 2025-01-13 DOI:10.1007/s10699-024-09965-w
Mirella Fortino
{"title":"On the Neo-Empiricist Thesis and Historicity of Science: Enriques and Neurath","authors":"Mirella Fortino","doi":"10.1007/s10699-024-09965-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>In this article, which testifies the European dimension of Federigo Enriques, an essential question is raised: is it conceivable to admit a radical antithesis between logical empiricism or neo-empiricism and the Enriquesian view of scientific thought? This paper therefore analyses the relationship between Enriques’ conception of science and that of Otto Neurath, one of the main representatives of neo-empiricism. While the interest towards empiricism in Enriques’ conception of the scientific knowledge is emphasised, it cannot be denied that the relationship of Enriques’ epistemology to the scientific idea of the world appears problematic. However, elements of convergence between Neurath and Enriques are discernible above all in the neo-empiricist principle of verification, in the idea of the unity of science and in the recognition by both of the historical nature of the scientific enterprise. In particular, the comparison is emphasised between Neurath’s idea of the encyclopaedia and Enriques’ rationalism, that highlights how, on closer inspection, Neurath’s critical view is not a true antithesis of the historical perspective of science.</p>","PeriodicalId":55146,"journal":{"name":"Foundations of Science","volume":"29 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Foundations of Science","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10699-024-09965-w","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In this article, which testifies the European dimension of Federigo Enriques, an essential question is raised: is it conceivable to admit a radical antithesis between logical empiricism or neo-empiricism and the Enriquesian view of scientific thought? This paper therefore analyses the relationship between Enriques’ conception of science and that of Otto Neurath, one of the main representatives of neo-empiricism. While the interest towards empiricism in Enriques’ conception of the scientific knowledge is emphasised, it cannot be denied that the relationship of Enriques’ epistemology to the scientific idea of the world appears problematic. However, elements of convergence between Neurath and Enriques are discernible above all in the neo-empiricist principle of verification, in the idea of the unity of science and in the recognition by both of the historical nature of the scientific enterprise. In particular, the comparison is emphasised between Neurath’s idea of the encyclopaedia and Enriques’ rationalism, that highlights how, on closer inspection, Neurath’s critical view is not a true antithesis of the historical perspective of science.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Foundations of Science
Foundations of Science HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE-
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
11.10%
发文量
51
期刊介绍: Foundations of Science focuses on methodological and philosophical topics of foundational significance concerning the structure and the growth of science. It serves as a forum for exchange of views and ideas among working scientists and theorists of science and it seeks to promote interdisciplinary cooperation. Since the various scientific disciplines have become so specialized and inaccessible to workers in different areas of science, one of the goals of the journal is to present the foundational issues of science in a way that is free from unnecessary technicalities yet faithful to the scientific content. The aim of the journal is not simply to identify and highlight foundational issues and problems, but to suggest constructive solutions to the problems. The editors of the journal admit that various sciences have approaches and methods that are peculiar to those individual sciences. However, they hold the view that important truths can be discovered about and by the sciences and that truths transcend cultural and political contexts. Although properly conducted historical and sociological inquiries can explain some aspects of the scientific enterprise, the editors believe that the central foundational questions of contemporary science can be posed and answered without recourse to sociological or historical methods.
期刊最新文献
Curiosity, Awe and Wonder: The Emotions that Open Our Mind On the Neo-Empiricist Thesis and Historicity of Science: Enriques and Neurath A Bayesian Analysis of the Hubble Tension Preparation and Test in Physics Maxwell’s Masterful Entanglement of Optics and Electromagnetism: Bottomed Questioning the Incommensurability Tenet
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1