The Contemporary Philosophy of Science: An Eternal Return

Epistemology and Philosophy of Science 59 (4):6-20 (2022)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The article explores the contemporary philosophy of science in the context of the idea of eternal return. The problematization of the intellectual field “after postpositivism” runs through the renewed questions “what?”, “how?”, “who?” and “for what?” of scientific research. This questioning is a search for bearings in the historical space and time that determines “after what?” or “back to whom?” the thinking about science unfolds. Such a reflexive appeal to the origins leads to the ideas of the philosophy of science of the first half of the twentieth century. It is then that the main differences within the research of science were formed: between sociological and methodological approaches, between philosophy and disciplines that study science, between the goals of forming a worldview and managing science. The philosophy of science “after postpositivism” expresses itself in the controversial interpretation of the subject matter and method of the study of science, in the division of labor between disciplines and approaches that lose the possibility of constructive interaction and reach the point of “science wars”. In conclusion, it is argued that philosophy as the "hard core” of scientific research, a historical appeal to the origins of scientific activity and the interpretation of the scientific revolution as a renewal of tradition can make such modernity valuable for return.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,349

External links

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

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Collective Agent as a Matter of Epistemological Analysis.Ilya Kasavin - 2015 - Epistemology and Philosophy of Science 46 (4):5-18.
Editors Remarks.Ilya Kasavin - 2015 - Epistemology and Philosophy of Science 45 (3):210-211.
Platonism, Aristotelianism, and Modern Science.Ivor Leclerc - 1976 - International Philosophical Quarterly 16 (2):135-149.
Can We Talk about the Fall of Science?Olga E. Stoliarova - 2019 - Epistemology and Philosophy of Science 56 (3):45-50.
The Temporal and the Eternal.George H. Langley - 1928 - The Monist 38 (3):413-428.
Libra.Harry Lyman Koopman - 1917 - The Monist 27 (3):455-459.
A reflection on the alternative philosophy of science.Dachun Liu & Yongmou Liu - 2009 - Frontiers of Philosophy in China 4 (4):576-588.
Affirmation and Mortal Life.Melanie Shepherd - 2011 - Philosophy Today 55 (1):22-36.
Disciplinary classifications and normative regulation of science.Ilya T. Kasavin - 2018 - Epistemology and Philosophy of Science 55 (1):23-30.
A priori and the Philosophy of Science. [REVIEW]Tatiana Sokolova - 2016 - Epistemology and Philosophy of Science 49 (3):225-231.

Analytics

Added to PP
2022-11-17

Downloads
16 (#883,649)

6 months
11 (#222,787)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Lada Shipovalova
St. Petersburg University

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references