Konstruktywistyczny szacunek do nauki. O podejściu Richarda Rorty’ego i Bruno Latoura

IF 0.4 0 PHILOSOPHY Diametros Pub Date : 2020-01-12 DOI:10.33392/DIAM.1161
T. Markiewka
{"title":"Konstruktywistyczny szacunek do nauki. O podejściu Richarda Rorty’ego i Bruno Latoura","authors":"T. Markiewka","doi":"10.33392/DIAM.1161","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The aim of the article is to answer how one can be a constructivist and treat science as one of the greatest achievements of contemporary societies at the same time. Since constructivism is a broad trend with many variations, the author focuses only on two of its members: Richard Rorty and Bruno Latour. He tries to show that, ,one can give a coherent answer to the question by combining selected aspects of their views. Although both Rorty and Latour reject a realistic account of science, they claim that science is an effective way of dealing with the world or, to use Latour’s term, with nonhumans. It is the pragmatic category of “dealing with reality”, rather than the philosophical ideas of representation or correspondence, that explains the high status of science. Both thinkers emphasize that the effective interactions with nonhumans are a consequence of the specific culture of cooperation and supervision which is typical of science.","PeriodicalId":42290,"journal":{"name":"Diametros","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Diametros","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33392/DIAM.1161","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The aim of the article is to answer how one can be a constructivist and treat science as one of the greatest achievements of contemporary societies at the same time. Since constructivism is a broad trend with many variations, the author focuses only on two of its members: Richard Rorty and Bruno Latour. He tries to show that, ,one can give a coherent answer to the question by combining selected aspects of their views. Although both Rorty and Latour reject a realistic account of science, they claim that science is an effective way of dealing with the world or, to use Latour’s term, with nonhumans. It is the pragmatic category of “dealing with reality”, rather than the philosophical ideas of representation or correspondence, that explains the high status of science. Both thinkers emphasize that the effective interactions with nonhumans are a consequence of the specific culture of cooperation and supervision which is typical 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
对科学的建设主义尊重。Richard Rorty和Bruno Latour的方法
这篇文章的目的是回答一个人如何成为一个建构主义者,同时将科学视为当代社会最伟大的成就之一。由于建构主义是一个有许多变体的大趋势,作者只关注其两个成员:Richard Rorty和Bruno Latour。他试图表明,一个人可以通过结合他们观点的选定方面来对这个问题给出连贯的答案。尽管Rorty和Latour都拒绝接受对科学的现实描述,但他们声称科学是处理世界的有效方式,或者用Latour的话说,是处理非人类的有效方式。正是“处理现实”的语用范畴,而不是表征或对应的哲学思想,解释了科学的崇高地位。两位思想家都强调,与非人类的有效互动是特定的合作和监督文化的结果,这是典型的科学文化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Diametros
Diametros PHILOSOPHY-
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
10
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊最新文献
I Act Therefore I Live? Autopoiesis, Sensorimotor Autonomy, and Extended Agency Research ethics in a multilingual world: A guide to reflecting on language decisions in all disciplines Expertise and Expert Authority Ethical challenges in contemporary social research (editorial) Beyond the participant-researcher division: co-creating ethical relationships through care and rapport in studies of post-laryngectomy communication
×
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