Philologischer fortschritt

Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 17 (2):229-255 (1986)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This paper is an attempt to establish a general perspective on approaching the philosophy of philology historically. Part I examines the problem of relating history to philosophy of philology, with a view to stressing the importance of historical intuitions about the discipline. It is asserted that such intuitions do not exist for the whole range of philological activities but only for a certain kind. Part II gives a brief survey on the beginnings of philology in the Hellenistic Age in order to make plausible a distinction between two types of philological research: working within a 'grammatical' framework on the one hand, and working within a 'critical' framework on the other. Part III includes a list of some strong historical intuitions about progressive developments in philology of the 'grammatical' kind, that could function as touchstones for appraising philosophical models. In the sequel, attention is drawn to the most important types of viewing progress in science. None of them is regarded as the philosophy of philology in question, but they all appear more in tune with our historical intuitions than the prevailing relativism

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,923

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
25 (#652,269)

6 months
4 (#859,620)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Ulrich Charpa
Ruhr-Universität Bochum

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

The sorites paradox.James Cargile - 1969 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 20 (3):193-202.
The fertility of theory and the unit for appraisal in science.Ernan McMullin - 1976 - In R. S. Cohen, P. K. Feyerabend & M. Wartofsky (eds.), Essays in Memory of Imre Lakatos. Reidel. pp. 395--432.
Whewell and Mill on the Relation Between Philosophy of Science and History of Science.John Losee - 1983 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 14 (2):113.

View all 13 references / Add more references