BibTex RIS Cite
Year 2017, Issue: 11, 183 - 199, 01.06.2017

Abstract

Anjan Chakravartty, “Metaphysics Between The Sciences And Philosophies Of Science”, P. D. Magnus & J. Busch (eds.)  New Waves in Philosophy of Science  (2010), Palgrave Macmillan. [Department of Philosophy University of Notre Dame, Director of John J. Reilly Center for Science, Technology, and Values]

References

  • Alston, W. P. (1954) ‘Are Positivists Metaphysicians’, Philosophical Review, 63, 43-57.
  • Barnes, B., D. Bloor, & J. Henry (1996) Scientific Knowledge: A Sociological Analysis (Chica- go: University of Chicago Press).
  • Bird, A. (2007) Nature’s Metaphysics: Laws and Properties (Oxford: Clarendon).
  • Burtt, E. A. (1959/1925) The Metaphysical Foundations of Modern Physical Science: A Histori- cal and Critical Essay (London: Routledge & K. Paul).
  • Chakravartty, A. (2007) ‘Six Degrees of Speculation: Metaphysics in Empirical Contexts’, in B. Monton (ed.) Images of Empiricism: Essays on Science and Stances, with a Reply from Bas C. van Fraassen (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
  • Chakravartty, A. (forthcoming) ‘A Puzzle about Voluntarism about Rational Epistemic Stances’, Synthese.
  • Christensen, D. (2007) ‘Epistemology of Disagreement: The Good News’, Philosophical Re- view, 116, 187-217.
  • Collingwood, R. G. (1998/1940) An Essay on Metaphysics, R. Martin (ed.) (Oxford: Cla- rendon).
  • Ellis, B. (2001) Scientific Essentialism (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
  • Friedman, M. (1999) Reconsidering Logical Positivism (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
  • Kuhn, T. S. (1962) The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (Chicago: University of Chicago Press).
  • Lüthy, C. (2000) ‘What to do with Seventeenth-Century Natural Philosophy? A Taxono- mic Problem’, Perspectives on Science, 8, 164-195.
  • Marcum, J. A. (2005) ‘Metaphysical Presuppositions and Scientific Practices: Reductionism and Organicism in Cancer Research’, International Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 19, 31-45.
  • Osler, M. J. (1996) ‘From Immanent Natures to Nature as Artifice: The Reinterpretation of Final Causes in Seventeenth-Century Natural Philosophy’, The Monist, 79, 388-407.
  • Psillos, S. (2005) ‘Scientific Realism and Metaphysics’, Ratio, 18, 385-404.
  • Rosen, G. (2001) ‘Nominalism, Naturalism, Epistemic Relativism’, Philosophical Perspectives, 15, 69-91.
  • Ross, G. M. (1998) ‘Okkulte Strömungen im 17. Jahrhundert’, A. Beriger (trans.), in J.-P. Schobinger (ed.) Friedrich Ueberwegs Grundriss der Geschichte der Philosophie, Reihe 5, 17. Jahrhundert, Band 1 (Basel: Schwabe).
  • van Fraassen, B. C. (2002) The Empirical Stance (New Haven: Yale University Press).
  • van Fraassen, B. C. (2004) ‘Replies to Discussion on The Empirical Stance’, Philosophical Studies, 121, 171-192.
  • White, R. (2005) ‘Epistemic Permissiveness’, Philosophical Perspectives, 19, 445-459.

Bilim Felsefeleri ve Bilimler Arasında Metafizik

Year 2017, Issue: 11, 183 - 199, 01.06.2017

Abstract

Doğa felsefesi evresinden, bugün modern bilim olarak adlandırdığımız evreye geçişin ardından, önceden evren hakkında kuramlaştırma olarak görülen modern bilim artık bağımsız temel felsefi bir uğraş olarak tanımlanmaktadır. Bunun hangi ölçüye kadar naif bir tanımlama olduğu tartışma konusudur, özellikle modern bilimsel bilginin yorumunda metafiziğin yeri hakkındaki görüşler büyük değişkenlikler göstermektedir. Mantıksal pozitivizm, bilim felsefesinde metafiziğe karşı günümüze kadar devam eden bir hoşnutsuzluğu doğurmuştu fakat son yıllarda analitik metafizik alanındaki bir Rönesans hareketi gittikçe artan sayıda bilim felsefecisi tarafından benimsenmektedir. Hoşnutsuzluğu yaşayan bilim felsefecileri yaygın olarak ya Humecu minimalist metafizik ya da genel metafiziksel sorunlar hakkında dinginci yaklaşımlarla aynı görüşü paylaşırlar. Metafiziği olumlayanlar ise özellikler, nedensellik, yasalar ve yöntem gibi şeylerin doğasına ilişkin yapılan metafiziksel araştırmaların, en iyi bilimsel kuramlarımızca donanmış, evrenin betimlemelerini yorumlayabilmek için gerekli olduğu kanısındadır. Bilim felsefesine ilişkin çağdaş yaklaşımları birbirinden ayıran varsayımları ve bu yaklaşımların sonuçlarına ilişkin görünümleri aşağıdaki sıralama içerisinde ele alacağım.1. Modern bilimlerin uzun dönemli doğuşu.2. Bilimde metafizik: Lehte ve Aleyhte.3. Tutum, rasyonalite ve değerler.4. Kaçınılmaz biçimde metafizik olarak bilimler.5. Bilimin gayeleri

References

  • Alston, W. P. (1954) ‘Are Positivists Metaphysicians’, Philosophical Review, 63, 43-57.
  • Barnes, B., D. Bloor, & J. Henry (1996) Scientific Knowledge: A Sociological Analysis (Chica- go: University of Chicago Press).
  • Bird, A. (2007) Nature’s Metaphysics: Laws and Properties (Oxford: Clarendon).
  • Burtt, E. A. (1959/1925) The Metaphysical Foundations of Modern Physical Science: A Histori- cal and Critical Essay (London: Routledge & K. Paul).
  • Chakravartty, A. (2007) ‘Six Degrees of Speculation: Metaphysics in Empirical Contexts’, in B. Monton (ed.) Images of Empiricism: Essays on Science and Stances, with a Reply from Bas C. van Fraassen (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
  • Chakravartty, A. (forthcoming) ‘A Puzzle about Voluntarism about Rational Epistemic Stances’, Synthese.
  • Christensen, D. (2007) ‘Epistemology of Disagreement: The Good News’, Philosophical Re- view, 116, 187-217.
  • Collingwood, R. G. (1998/1940) An Essay on Metaphysics, R. Martin (ed.) (Oxford: Cla- rendon).
  • Ellis, B. (2001) Scientific Essentialism (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
  • Friedman, M. (1999) Reconsidering Logical Positivism (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
  • Kuhn, T. S. (1962) The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (Chicago: University of Chicago Press).
  • Lüthy, C. (2000) ‘What to do with Seventeenth-Century Natural Philosophy? A Taxono- mic Problem’, Perspectives on Science, 8, 164-195.
  • Marcum, J. A. (2005) ‘Metaphysical Presuppositions and Scientific Practices: Reductionism and Organicism in Cancer Research’, International Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 19, 31-45.
  • Osler, M. J. (1996) ‘From Immanent Natures to Nature as Artifice: The Reinterpretation of Final Causes in Seventeenth-Century Natural Philosophy’, The Monist, 79, 388-407.
  • Psillos, S. (2005) ‘Scientific Realism and Metaphysics’, Ratio, 18, 385-404.
  • Rosen, G. (2001) ‘Nominalism, Naturalism, Epistemic Relativism’, Philosophical Perspectives, 15, 69-91.
  • Ross, G. M. (1998) ‘Okkulte Strömungen im 17. Jahrhundert’, A. Beriger (trans.), in J.-P. Schobinger (ed.) Friedrich Ueberwegs Grundriss der Geschichte der Philosophie, Reihe 5, 17. Jahrhundert, Band 1 (Basel: Schwabe).
  • van Fraassen, B. C. (2002) The Empirical Stance (New Haven: Yale University Press).
  • van Fraassen, B. C. (2004) ‘Replies to Discussion on The Empirical Stance’, Philosophical Studies, 121, 171-192.
  • White, R. (2005) ‘Epistemic Permissiveness’, Philosophical Perspectives, 19, 445-459.
There are 20 citations in total.

Details

Other ID JA89KA83TR
Journal Section Translation
Authors

Bilimler Arasında Metafizik This is me

Publication Date June 1, 2017
Submission Date June 1, 2017
Published in Issue Year 2017 Issue: 11

Cite

APA Metafizik, B. A. (2017). Bilim Felsefeleri ve Bilimler Arasında Metafizik. Dört Öge(11), 183-199.