The Constituent Effect of Practice on the Modern Science: Solidarity between Homo Faber and Homo Economicus

Abstract

The acknowledgements of the emergence of Modern Science as a revolution in history of thought suppose that its epistemological foundations developed unique to the West and reached its sufficiency after the industrial revolution in determining the common needs of the society. In this work, about the background aspects of the developments in natural philosophy, we observed that the daily practices and the mechanical arts played crucial role in rivalry between the social classes for building an ontological security. The problem of the emblematic view of the outside world gave the opportunity for experimental science and mechanical arts to be the only way of producing knowledge suitable to phenomena. The continuity of this situation is ensured by the solidarity of the bourgeois and artisans as social classes giving existential struggle ending with high level of reputation in the society. As a result of this process, the controllable and verifiable knowledge order made a mental transformation towards the emergence of contemporary tekhne

Keywords

• Tekhne, Scientific Revolution, Mechanical Arts, Ontological Security, Homo economicus, Homo faber, Practice, Natural Philosophy, Quantification

Modern Bilimde Pratiğin Kurucu Etkisi: Homo Faber-Homo Economicus Dayanışması

Öz

Modern bilimin bir devrim olarak düşünce tarihinde belirmesine ilişkin kabuller, onun epistemolojik yapısının biricik bir unsur olarak Batı’ya has geliştiğini, bu yapının da zorunlu olarak Sanayi Devrimi ve sonrası modern toplumun pratik taleplerini düzenleyecek yetkinliğe ulaştığını öne sürmektedir. Bu çalışmamızda yeni bir yöntem üzerinden 16. yüzyıl boyunca Avrupa’da doğa felsefesi alanında ortaya çıkan gelişmelerin arka planına ilişkin olarak, “değişimlerin, ontolojik güven inşasında birinci derece rol oynayan günlük pratik deneyimlerin ve mekanik sanatların, toplumsal sınıf rekabetinde temel unsur olduğu” sonucuna ulaşılmıştır. Dış dünyaya ilişkin simgesel algı problemi, vakıaya uygun bilgi üretiminde deneysel bilim ve mekanik sanatların tek kanal üzerinden ortaya çıkmasını sağlamıştır. Bu kanalın sürekliliği, yeni düzende etkin rol alan burjuva ve sanatkârların var olma mücadelesindeki dayanışmalarına bağlı olarak kalıcı hâle gelmiştir. Bu sürecin bir sonucu olarak ortak akıl ile denetlenebilir ve doğrulanabilir bilgi düzeni, zihniyet dönüşümüne sebep olmuş ve çağdaş tekhne ortaya çıkmıştır

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Tekhne, Mekanik Sanatlar, Ontolojik Gü- venlik, Homo economicus, Homo faber, Pratik, Doğa Felsefesi, Nicelleştirme

References

1. Aquinas, Thomas, Commentary on Aristotle’s Metaphysics, çev. John P. Rowan, Chicago: Regnery, 1961.
2. Bacon, Francis, Great Instauration, USA: Kessinger Publishing, 1996.
3. Bacon, Francis, Of the Wisdom of the Ancients, New York: Kessin- ger Publishing, 1992.
4. Bacon, Francis, The New Organon, nşr. Lisa Jardine, Michael Sil- werthorne, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000.
5. Bergson, Henri Creative Evolution, çev. Arther Mitchell, Los An- gelos: Indo European Publications, 2010.
6. Bowles, Samuel ve Herbert Gintis, Homo reciprocans: A Research Initiative on the Origins, Dimensions, and Policy Implications of Reciprocal Fairness, erişim tarihi 15.04.2013 http://www.umass. edu/preferen/gintis/homo.pdf.
7. Brockliss, Laurance “Science, Universities and Other Public Pla- ces”, The Cambridge History of Science 4 içinde, ed. Roy Porter, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008.
8. mak için, bir muameleye tâbi tutulmasına ihtiyaç hâsıl olur. İşte tedbirler

9. ilmi, bunların tabii ve duyulur cisimlerde sun’i olarak ve bilfiil meydana ge
10. tirilmesinin bilgisini veren ilimdir.”
11. Farabi ilm-i hiyeli tanımlamaya devam ederek, sözkonusu ilmin denklem
12. lerde de kullanıldığını, geometri hesaplarının da bu kapsamda olduğunu,
13. bina reisliği (mimarlık), yıldızlar ve musıki için aletler yapmak ve uzakta bu
14. lunan cisimler hakkında doğru bilgi veren optik aletler yapmak için alınan
15. tedbirlerin de bu ilme dâhil olduğunu belirtir. Bkz. Mehmet Farabi, İlim
16. lerin Sayımı: İhsa’-ül Ulum (çev. Prof. Mehmet Ateş, İstanbul: Milli Eğitim
17. Basımevi, 1986), s. 102-3.
18. Butterfield, Herbert, Origins of Modern Science, Great Britain: G. Bell & Sons Ltd., 1957.
19. Campbell, Robert, The London Tradesman, London: T. Gardner, 1747.
20. Dalton, Susan, Engendering the Republic of Letters: Reconnecting Public and Private Spheres, Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2003.
21. Daston, Loraine ve Park, Kathrine, Wonders and Order of Nature 1150-1750, New York: Zone Books, 1998
22. Davis, Zachary ve Steinbock Anthony, “Max Scheler”, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Metaphysics Research Lab, erişim ta- rihi 02.02.2011, http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/scheler.
23. Davutoğlu, Ahmet Alternative Paradigms: The Impact of Islamic and Western Weltanschauungs on Political Theory, London: Uni- versity Press of America, 1994.
24. Deleuze, Gilles, Spinoza: Practical Philosophy, çev. Robert Hur- ley, San Francisco: City Lights Books, 1988
25. Eamon, William, “From the secrets of Nature to Public Knowled- ge”, Reappraisals of Scientific Revolution, New York: Cambridge University Press,1990
26. Eamon, William, Science and the Secrets of Nature, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1994.
27. Eamon, Willliam, “From the Secrets of Nature to Public Know- ledge”, Reappraisals of Scientific Revolution içinde, ed. David Lind- berg ve Robert Westman, New York: Cambridge University Press, 1990
28. Farabi, Mehmet, İlimlerin Sayımı: İhsa’-ül Ulum, çev. Prof. Meh- met Ateş, İstanbul: Milli Eğitim Basımevi, 1986.
29. Gasset, Ortega y, Man as a Project, çev. Samuel Moody, Reading for Philosophical Inquiry: Article Series, erişim tarihi 10.12.2012, http://philosophy.lander.edu/intro/articles/ortega-a.pdf.
30. Giddens, Anthony, Modernity and Self-identity: Self and Society in the Late Modern Age, California: Stanford University Press, 1991.
31. Goodman, Dena, The Republic of Letters: A Cultural History of the French Enlightenment, London: Cornell University Press, 1994.
32. Hall, Maria Boss, Promoting Experimental Learning, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991.
33. Heidegger, Martin, Bilim Üzerine İki Ders: Bilim ve Düşünüm, Modern Bilim, Metafizik ve Matematik, çev. Hakkı Hünler, İstan- bul: Paradigma Yayınları, 1998
34. Henry, John, Scientific Revolution, Palgrave Macmillan, Hong Kong, 2002.
35. Hooke, Robert, Micrographia: Some Physological Descriptions of Minute Bodies, London: Jo. Martyn, 1665.
36. Hundert E.J., “The Making of Homo Faber: John Locke betwe- en Ideology and History”, Journal of the History of the Ideas 33/1, (1972): 8-22. Alıntı: John Locke, A Report to the Board of Trade to the Lords Justices (1697), London: Respecting the Relief and Unemp- loyment of the Poor, 1789.
37. Hunter, Michael, “A ‘College’ for the Royal Society: The Abortive Plan of 1667-1668”, Notes Rec. R. Soc. Lond., London: Royal Society, 1984.
38. Inkster, Ian, “Potentially Global: ‘Useful and Reliable Knowled- ge’ and Material Progress in Europe, 1474-1914”, The International History Review 28, (2006).
39. Jonas, Hans, Practical Use of Theory in Phenemonen of Life, Illi- nois: Northwestern University Press, 2001.
40. Kant, Immanuel Conflict of the Faculties, çev. Mary Gregor, New York: Abaris Books, 1979.
41. Kim, Sung Ho, “Max Weber”, Stanford Encyclopedia of Philo- sophy, erişim tarihi 03.03.2013, http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ weber/#IdeTyp
42. Klein, Jurgen, “Francis Bacons’s Scientia Operativa”, The Philo- sophies of Technology: Francis Bacon and Its Contemporaries için- de, ed. Claus Zittel, Gisela Engel, Nicole C. Karafyllis ve Romano Nanni Leiden: Brill, 2008.
43. Long, Pamela,, “Invention, Authorship, “Intellectual Property,” and the Origin of Patents: Notes toward a Conceptual History”, Technology and Culture Vol. 32, No. 4, 1991 : 846-884
44. Mandeville, Bernard, Fable of the Bees, London: J. Tonson, 1728.
45. Persky, Joseph, “Retrospectives: The Ethology of Homo Econo- micus”, The Journal of Economic Perspectives 9/2, (Spring 1995): 221-231.
46. Rees, Abraham (ed.), Universal Dictionary of Arts Sciences and Literature, Edinburgh: Longman, 1816.
47. Roberts, Lisa “Mapping Steam Engines and Skill in Eighteenth Century Holland”, The Mindful Hand: Inquiry and Invention from the Late Renaissance to Early Industrialisation içinde, ed. Lisa Ro- berts, Simon Schaffer ve Peter Dear, Leiden: Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences, 2007.
48. Roberts, Lissa, “Science Becomes Electric: Dutch Interaction with the Electrical Machine during the Eighteenth Century”, Isis 90/4, (1999).
49. Rocha, Luis M., Technology, erişim tarihi 23.03.2012 http://infor- matics.indiana.edu/rocha/i101/pdfs/i101_lecnotes_v2.pdf.
50. Rosenstock-Huessy, Eugen, Circulation of Thought, Vol. 1, Dart- mouth College (Lecture Notes), Hanover: Dartmouth College, 1949
51. Rossi, Paolo, Francis Bacon: From Magic to Science, London: Ro- utledge & Kegan Paul, 2003.
52. Schaffer, Simon ve Peter Dear, Leiden: Royal Netherlands Aca- demy of Arts and Sciences, 2007.
53. Syfret, R.H., “The Origins of the Royal Society”, Notes Rec. R. Soc. Lond, London: Royal Society, 1948.
54. Turner, G.L.E., “Eighteenth Century Scientific Instruments and Their Makers”, The Cambridge History of Science, c. 4 içinde, ed. Roy Porter, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008.
55. Weeks Sophia, “Mechanics in Bacons Great Instauration”, The Philosophies of Technology: Francis Bacon and Its Contemporaries içinde, ed. Claus Zittel, Gisela Engel, Nicole C. Karafyllis ve Roma- no Nanni, Leiden: Brill, 2008.
56. Wonders and Order of Nature 1150-1750, New York: Zone Books, 1998.