石灰石垂直容器炉煅烧优化

A. S. Gutiérrez
{"title":"石灰石垂直容器炉煅烧优化","authors":"A. S. Gutiérrez","doi":"10.5935/2447-0228.20150002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Modern science has no basis of positivist epistemological and methodological foundations sufficient for building a comprehensive understanding of the world of man and society. A study of contrasts to the paradigms of science, technology and modern rationality expressed the thoughts of Jürgen Habermas, Herbert Marcuse, Martin Heidegger, Theodor Adorno, Max Horkheimer, and Boaventura Santos Souza was conducted. We used a dialectic approach to highlight the contradictions and limitations of this paradigm and highlight other paradigms of positivist epistemological basis not carry that enabled the overcoming of knowledge as regulation by knowledge empowerment. It was evident, based on the theories of these authors and arguments of researchers such as Albert Einstein, Ilya Prigogine, Michel Foucault, among others, that modern science has methodological limitations Cartesian basis and fragile epistemological basis when trying to conceive man, world and society while dynamically articulated.","PeriodicalId":236176,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Engineering and Technology for Industrial Applications","volume":"30 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Limestone calcination optimization of vertical container oven\",\"authors\":\"A. S. Gutiérrez\",\"doi\":\"10.5935/2447-0228.20150002\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Modern science has no basis of positivist epistemological and methodological foundations sufficient for building a comprehensive understanding of the world of man and society. A study of contrasts to the paradigms of science, technology and modern rationality expressed the thoughts of Jürgen Habermas, Herbert Marcuse, Martin Heidegger, Theodor Adorno, Max Horkheimer, and Boaventura Santos Souza was conducted. We used a dialectic approach to highlight the contradictions and limitations of this paradigm and highlight other paradigms of positivist epistemological basis not carry that enabled the overcoming of knowledge as regulation by knowledge empowerment. It was evident, based on the theories of these authors and arguments of researchers such as Albert Einstein, Ilya Prigogine, Michel Foucault, among others, that modern science has methodological limitations Cartesian basis and fragile epistemological basis when trying to conceive man, world and society while dynamically articulated.\",\"PeriodicalId\":236176,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Engineering and Technology for Industrial Applications\",\"volume\":\"30 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1900-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Engineering and Technology for Industrial Applications\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5935/2447-0228.20150002\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Engineering and Technology for Industrial Applications","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5935/2447-0228.20150002","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

现代科学缺乏充分的实证主义认识论基础和方法论基础来建立对人类和社会世界的全面理解。对哈贝马斯、马尔库塞、海德格尔、阿多诺、霍克海默和索萨等人的科学、技术和现代理性思想范式进行了对比研究。我们用辩证法的方法强调了这一范式的矛盾和局限性,并强调了其他实证主义认识论基础的范式,而不是通过知识授权来克服知识作为调节。很明显,基于这些作者的理论和阿尔伯特·爱因斯坦、伊利亚·普里高金、米歇尔·福柯等研究者的论点,现代科学在试图动态地构思人、世界和社会时,存在着方法论上的局限性,笛卡尔式的基础和脆弱的认识论基础。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Limestone calcination optimization of vertical container oven
Modern science has no basis of positivist epistemological and methodological foundations sufficient for building a comprehensive understanding of the world of man and society. A study of contrasts to the paradigms of science, technology and modern rationality expressed the thoughts of Jürgen Habermas, Herbert Marcuse, Martin Heidegger, Theodor Adorno, Max Horkheimer, and Boaventura Santos Souza was conducted. We used a dialectic approach to highlight the contradictions and limitations of this paradigm and highlight other paradigms of positivist epistemological basis not carry that enabled the overcoming of knowledge as regulation by knowledge empowerment. It was evident, based on the theories of these authors and arguments of researchers such as Albert Einstein, Ilya Prigogine, Michel Foucault, among others, that modern science has methodological limitations Cartesian basis and fragile epistemological basis when trying to conceive man, world and society while dynamically articulated.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Random forest algorithm use for crop recommendation A comprehensive analysis of the simulation, optimization, corrosion and design aspects of crude distillation units Appraising the maintenance practices in shopping malls across Lagos metropolis A multi-objective hunter-prey optimization for optimal integration of capacitor banks and photovoltaic distribution generation units in radial distribution systems ABM-OCD: Advancing ovarian cancer diagnosis with attention-based models and 3D CNNs
×
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