Autor przedstawia krytyczną analizę pewnych idei nominalistycznej teorii N. Goodmana w interpretacji R. Eberlego. Teoria ta, czyli „rachunek indywiduów", oparta jest na trzech podstawowych pojęciach, zasadzie sumowania, relacji „część-całość" i zasadzie indywidualizacji. Owe pojęcia wzięte razem charakteryzują przedmioty, które chcemy zaliczyć do indywiduów, przy czym charakterystyka ta określa raczej czym jest pewien zespół indywiduów, niż to czym jest pojedyncze indywiduum. Według Eberlego na specjalną uwagę zasługują tzw. atomistyczne uniwersa indywiduów. Definicja takich uniwersów ma stanowić właśnie określenie tego, czym są indywidua. (...) W ogólności „atomistyczne uniwersum indywiduów" to podzbiór pola relacji „część-całość", w którym są spełnione odpowiednie warunki dotyczące sumowania i indywidualizacji przedmiotów. Pojęcie to autor wiąże z atomizmem logicznym B. Russella oraz rozważa jego możliwe zastosowania. (shrink)

The author deals with the problem of the unity of science. Four main ideas of logical empiricism connected with the unity of science: unity of language, unity of laws, unity of methods and the unity of scientific practice are considered from contemporary point of view.

In 2006 Tomasz F. Bigaj published in English a book "Non-locality and the Possible Worlds. A Counterfactual Perspective on Quantum Entanglement". He considered the question whether a satisfactory interpretation of quantum mechanics in the standard form should include the assumption of a non-local, immediate influence of one part of a specific quantum system (like two electrons in the singlet state) on the other, spatially separated part of that system. Bigaj - following H. Stapp - chooses as conceptual instruments of his (...) analysis counterfactual conditional statements and possible-worlds semantics of such statements. After thorough examination of different Stapp's arguments, he reaches the conclusion "that no matter what available interpretation of counterfactuals we decide to follow, there is no need in standard quantum mechanics for measurement-included non-locality". My critique concerns mainly Bigaj's selection of conceptual tools: the counterfactuals and possible-worlds semantics. I point to the fact that such selection assumes the "necessitarian" interpretation of laws of nature in the domain of micro-objects (e.g. for systems like two electrons in the singlet state). The different, "regularist" interpretation of physical laws in that domain is possible as well, and counterfactual arguments are not valid for such interpretation. (shrink)

The views described as „scientistic” often find expression in the form of evaluations or normative, and usually recommend cognitive procedures and methods patterned after natural sciences. Those who address the scientistic directives to philosophers can be recognized as representatives of the metaphilosophical scientism: they promote „a scientific philosophy” and assume primarily the methodological-imitative attitude towards (natural) science. The one who addresses the scientistic directives to scholars in the humanities and social science can be recognized as a representative of metascientific type (...) of scientism, promoting „the unity of science” and assuming the methodological-normative attitude towards the mentioned disciplines. The term „scientism” also often represents a specific outlook on life understood as „popular scientistic philosophy”: it addresses the scientistic directives to all members of a society, and promotes convictions concerning an exceptional public mission of science which should have not only a cognitive, but also a practical character. The central appeal of the article is following: do not confuse the metascientific and metaphilosophical scientism - with the „popular” one! (shrink)

in the article different kinds of theory reduction are distinguished and discussed with respect to additional assumptions which are usually added to the reducing theory. A particular kind of so-called geometrical structural assumptions are analysed, and some outline of their possible classification is presented.