海德格尔与库恩的“世界”与“范式”

Mateo Belgrano
{"title":"海德格尔与库恩的“世界”与“范式”","authors":"Mateo Belgrano","doi":"10.21500/01201468.4716","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"My goal in this paper is to compare Heidegger’s philosophy of science with Thomas Kuhn’s. With this comparison I want to pursue two goals: 1) using Kuhn’s arsenal of conceptual tools, to make Heidegger’s position appear in a clearer fashion; and 2) to show that Heidegger’s and Kuhn’s positions are not so different as one might expect. I will, thus, suggest that these philosophies can be compatible. I will show that, even if there are differences, there are many similarities as well. I will address three issues: 1) the differences and similarities between Kuhn’s notion of paradigm and Heidegger’s notion of world; 2) the analogous concepts of “normal science” and “calculating thinking”; and 3) the source of intelligibility in both authors. Here, I believe, is where the main difference between both thinkers lays.","PeriodicalId":30546,"journal":{"name":"Franciscanum","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"‘World’ and ‘Paradigm’ in Heidegger and Kuhn\",\"authors\":\"Mateo Belgrano\",\"doi\":\"10.21500/01201468.4716\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"My goal in this paper is to compare Heidegger’s philosophy of science with Thomas Kuhn’s. With this comparison I want to pursue two goals: 1) using Kuhn’s arsenal of conceptual tools, to make Heidegger’s position appear in a clearer fashion; and 2) to show that Heidegger’s and Kuhn’s positions are not so different as one might expect. I will, thus, suggest that these philosophies can be compatible. I will show that, even if there are differences, there are many similarities as well. I will address three issues: 1) the differences and similarities between Kuhn’s notion of paradigm and Heidegger’s notion of world; 2) the analogous concepts of “normal science” and “calculating thinking”; and 3) the source of intelligibility in both authors. Here, I believe, is where the main difference between both thinkers lays.\",\"PeriodicalId\":30546,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Franciscanum\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-01-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Franciscanum\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21500/01201468.4716\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Franciscanum","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21500/01201468.4716","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

本文的目的是将海德格尔的科学哲学与托马斯·库恩的科学哲学进行比较。通过这种比较,我想追求两个目标:1)利用库恩的概念工具库,使海德格尔的立场以一种更清晰的方式出现;2)表明海德格尔和库恩的立场并不像人们想象的那么不同。因此,我认为这两种哲学是可以兼容的。我要说明的是,即使存在差异,也有许多相似之处。我将讨论三个问题:1)库恩的范式观与海德格尔的世界观的异同;2)“常规科学”与“计算思维”的类比概念;3)两位作者可理解性的来源。我认为,这就是两位思想家的主要区别所在。
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
‘World’ and ‘Paradigm’ in Heidegger and Kuhn
My goal in this paper is to compare Heidegger’s philosophy of science with Thomas Kuhn’s. With this comparison I want to pursue two goals: 1) using Kuhn’s arsenal of conceptual tools, to make Heidegger’s position appear in a clearer fashion; and 2) to show that Heidegger’s and Kuhn’s positions are not so different as one might expect. I will, thus, suggest that these philosophies can be compatible. I will show that, even if there are differences, there are many similarities as well. I will address three issues: 1) the differences and similarities between Kuhn’s notion of paradigm and Heidegger’s notion of world; 2) the analogous concepts of “normal science” and “calculating thinking”; and 3) the source of intelligibility in both authors. Here, I believe, is where the main difference between both thinkers lays.
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
26
审稿时长
40 weeks
期刊最新文献
Pablo, intérprete de la historia en la carta a los Gálatas La familia hoy: una lectura a través de la imagen digital Articulación para un encuentro entre la comunicabilidad divina en prácticas chamánicas con alucinógenos, y la revelación en sentido cristiano Pedagogías ante la desaparición. Fuentes literarias y pictóricas para las imágenes de san Francisco de Asís en la Baja Edad Media
×
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