The development of science, proceeding at a higher and higher speed, leads to the creation of new concepts, theories, and ideas. They constitute a progressive component of science. However, scientific development does not mean that everything that was accepted earlier has to be given up. New elements may be acquired and exist together with the old ones. Such old elements constitute a conservative component of science. That is why modern science shows itself as a wholeness constituted by the above-mentioned components.

One can say about two sources of philosophy of nature created at the Catholic University of Lublin. One of them was the Theological Faculty at the Warsaw University in the 50s of the previous century. The scientific climate functioning in it induced Rev. Stanisław Mazierski to put through a profound examination the traditional style which then dominated in cultivating philosophy of nature. That analysis showed necessity of opening philosophy of nature to achievements of the contemporary science, especially of mathematical and (...) physical structure. The second source constitutes the Faculty of Natural Sciences of the Mary Curie- Skłodowska University in Lublin and the Holy Cross Mountains. Rev. Włodzimierz Sedlak, bewitched by nature, by its mysteries and by contemporary science investigating them, and endowed with the enormous intuition, interlocked a lot of scientific domains, forming a whole and proposing a fascinating view of the world. Some people were alarmed by it, some others were even resentful of it. The both above-mentioned sources, mutatis mutandis, exist till the present day. Each of them, in spite of their dissimilarity (taking into account at least different personalities of the both protagonists of philosophy of nature created at the Catholic University of Lublin) demands philosophy of nature to be an unconventional, and made in novel fashion, form of \"philosophizing over this nature\". These both styles of \"philosophizing over nature\" have been enriching themselves and have been evolving and prospering. They are present and alive among continuators of the protagonists\' work. The contemporary philosophy of nature, being still created in Lublin, is the only one, when comparing it to that of performed at other universities of this country and of the world outside. (shrink)

The contemporary science can be defined in a cybernetic language as a self-organising system. The development of this system is guided and controlled by streams of information items produced by science. At present this development assumes more and more clearly the shape of the evolutionary variability. In its input there are data. Their united sets constitute information items which, owing to their bringing together, form the human knowledge. Integration process of the human knowledge results in the wisdom. In this way (...) the post-industrial science has an evolutionary character coming in a form of a system \"from information towards wisdom\". It is very important to state a simple sum of data not to give any information, and as well a simple sum of information items not to give any knowledge, and then a simple sum of items which constitute knowledge not to give any wisdom. Only the process of integration causes a conversion from a lower level of cognition to its higher one. The essence of this process seems to be inspired by a creative intuition of an explorer-researcher who executes the above mentioned integration. (shrink)

This article briefly presents and characterizes a relatively young (nineteen-nineties) trend in methodology, the theory of science – and philosophy, called “the new experimentalism”. The fundamental problem is determined by the question about the value of the new experimentalism and experimental grounds of scientific knowledge in empirical sciences. In the first part of the article, the previous (old) experimentalism is presented. First of all, the history of the experimental method is outlined and the definitions of experiment, object, phenomenon, and of (...) the carried out and analyzed observation are provided. It is shown why the main proposition of experimentalists – “determining a fact based on sensory experience” is fallacious. The second part describes the way in which the representatives of the new experimentalism try to identify and characterize those factors of an experiment that guarantee the objectivity of its result; demonstrate that results are not only determined by psychological, historical, sociological or economic factors but also that they exist in nature as real objects and events. A correct and reliable analysis of the experiment and its results may – according to the new experimentalists – contribute to this conclusion. Therefore, the important role and value of the experimental foundation of social activity in general, and in particular, for the natural sciences, is rightly noted. (shrink)