柳树真的会哭泣吗?认知、语法和多元论问题 近代科学中的概念、语言和元科学分歧

Filippo Batisti
{"title":"柳树真的会哭泣吗?认知、语法和多元论问题 近代科学中的概念、语言和元科学分歧","authors":"Filippo Batisti","doi":"10.30687/jolma/2723-9640/2023/02/008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper will serve two functions. First, as a foreword to the other es- says that compose this monographic issue of the journal. It will also provide a critical discussion on two major issues that emerged in the general. The first consists in seeing the philosophical outcomes of new developments in science through the lens of the language that is used to describe them. The second pertains to the metascientific level of the disagreement, as this new evidence challenges the established understanding of scientific practice and its philosophical foundations. The case of plant cognition will be examined in some detail to illustrate both issues.","PeriodicalId":516938,"journal":{"name":"De-Humanizing Cognition, Intelligence, and Agency. A Critical Assessment Between Philosophy, Ethics, and Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Do Willows Really Weep? Cognition, Its Grammar, and the Problem of Pluralism\\n Conceptual, Linguistic and Metascientific Disagreements in Recent Science\",\"authors\":\"Filippo Batisti\",\"doi\":\"10.30687/jolma/2723-9640/2023/02/008\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper will serve two functions. First, as a foreword to the other es- says that compose this monographic issue of the journal. It will also provide a critical discussion on two major issues that emerged in the general. The first consists in seeing the philosophical outcomes of new developments in science through the lens of the language that is used to describe them. The second pertains to the metascientific level of the disagreement, as this new evidence challenges the established understanding of scientific practice and its philosophical foundations. The case of plant cognition will be examined in some detail to illustrate both issues.\",\"PeriodicalId\":516938,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"De-Humanizing Cognition, Intelligence, and Agency. A Critical Assessment Between Philosophy, Ethics, and Science\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"De-Humanizing Cognition, Intelligence, and Agency. A Critical Assessment Between Philosophy, Ethics, and Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.30687/jolma/2723-9640/2023/02/008\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"De-Humanizing Cognition, Intelligence, and Agency. A Critical Assessment Between Philosophy, Ethics, and Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.30687/jolma/2723-9640/2023/02/008","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

本文有两个作用。首先,作为本期期刊其他专题的前言。它还将对一般情况下出现的两个主要问题进行批判性讨论。第一个问题是通过描述科学新发展的语言来看待其哲学成果。第二个问题涉及分歧的元科学层面,因为新证据挑战了对科学实践及其哲学基础的既定理解。为了说明这两个问题,我们将详细研究植物认知的案例。
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
Do Willows Really Weep? Cognition, Its Grammar, and the Problem of Pluralism Conceptual, Linguistic and Metascientific Disagreements in Recent Science
This paper will serve two functions. First, as a foreword to the other es- says that compose this monographic issue of the journal. It will also provide a critical discussion on two major issues that emerged in the general. The first consists in seeing the philosophical outcomes of new developments in science through the lens of the language that is used to describe them. The second pertains to the metascientific level of the disagreement, as this new evidence challenges the established understanding of scientific practice and its philosophical foundations. The case of plant cognition will be examined in some detail to illustrate both issues.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Do Willows Really Weep? Cognition, Its Grammar, and the Problem of Pluralism Conceptual, Linguistic and Metascientific Disagreements in Recent Science On the Genesis, Continuum, and the Lowest Bound of Selves What Are We Talking About When We Talk About Cognition? Human, Cybernetic, and Phylogenetic Conceptual Schemes Extending the Concept of Cognition and Meta‑Theoretical Anthropomorphism The Consequences of Enactivism on Moral Considerability in Environmental Ethics
×
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