C. S. Peirce and G. M. Searle: The Hoax of Infallibilism
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2013 |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Cognitio (São Paulo. Online) |
Texto Completo: | https://revistas.pucsp.br/index.php/cognitiofilosofia/article/view/13529 |
Resumo: | George M. Searle (1839-1918) and Charles S. Peirce worked together in the Coast Survey and the Harvard Observatory during the decade of 1860: both scientists were assistants of Joseph Winlock, the director of the Observatory. When in 1868 George, a convert to Catholicism, left to enter the Paulist Fathers, he was replaced by his brother Arthur Searle. George was ordained as a priest in 1871, was a lecturer of Mathematics and Astronomy at the Catholic University of America and became the fourth superior general of his congregation from 1904 to 1909. Among the books he wrote intended for non-Catholics was Plain Facts for Fair Minds (1895). On the 8th of August 1895, Peirce found that book in a bookstore and the following day wrote a letter to George Searle expressing strong about papal infallibility. This letter (L 397) is almost unknown amongst Peirce’s scholars.After describing these historical circumstances as a framework, the aim of my paper is to describe Peirce’s arguments against papal infallibility presented by George Searle in his book, and the contrast between the genuine scientific attitude and the putative metaphysical notion of absolute truth that is — according to Peirce — behind Searle’s defense of infallibility. In this sense, Peirce’s fallibilism will be explained with some detail, giving account also of his practical infallibilism.Finally, having in mind the present interest on Peirce’s religious ideas it will be suggested that some of Peirce’s ideas on infallibility are nearer to contemporary understanding of that issue than Searle’s defense. |
id |
PUC_SP-15_6830d29e32916977c255d2151e7c6613 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:ojs.pkp.sfu.ca:article/13529 |
network_acronym_str |
PUC_SP-15 |
network_name_str |
Cognitio (São Paulo. Online) |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
C. S. Peirce and G. M. Searle: The Hoax of InfallibilismC. S. Peirce e G. M. Searle: O Embuste do InfalibilismoFalibilismoInfalibilidadeDogmaCatolicismoAtitude científicaCharles S. PeirceG.M. SearleFallibilismInfallibilityDogmaCatholicismScientific attitudeCharles S. PeirceG.M. SearleGeorge M. Searle (1839-1918) and Charles S. Peirce worked together in the Coast Survey and the Harvard Observatory during the decade of 1860: both scientists were assistants of Joseph Winlock, the director of the Observatory. When in 1868 George, a convert to Catholicism, left to enter the Paulist Fathers, he was replaced by his brother Arthur Searle. George was ordained as a priest in 1871, was a lecturer of Mathematics and Astronomy at the Catholic University of America and became the fourth superior general of his congregation from 1904 to 1909. Among the books he wrote intended for non-Catholics was Plain Facts for Fair Minds (1895). On the 8th of August 1895, Peirce found that book in a bookstore and the following day wrote a letter to George Searle expressing strong about papal infallibility. This letter (L 397) is almost unknown amongst Peirce’s scholars.After describing these historical circumstances as a framework, the aim of my paper is to describe Peirce’s arguments against papal infallibility presented by George Searle in his book, and the contrast between the genuine scientific attitude and the putative metaphysical notion of absolute truth that is — according to Peirce — behind Searle’s defense of infallibility. In this sense, Peirce’s fallibilism will be explained with some detail, giving account also of his practical infallibilism.Finally, having in mind the present interest on Peirce’s religious ideas it will be suggested that some of Peirce’s ideas on infallibility are nearer to contemporary understanding of that issue than Searle’s defense.George M. Searle (1839-1918) e Charles S. Peirce trabalharam juntos na Coast Survey e no Observatório de Harvard durante a década de 1860: os dois cientistas foram assistentes de Joseph Winlock, o diretor do Observatório. Quando, em 1868, George, convertido ao catolicismo, deixouo para se juntar aos Padres Paulinos, ele foi substituído por seu irmão Arthur Searle. George foi ordenado padre em 1871, foi lente de Matemática e Astronomia na Universidade Católica da América e tornou-se o quarto padre superior de sua congregação de 1904 a 1909. Entre os livros que escreveu para não-católicos está Fatos Simples para Mentes Razoáveis (1895). No dia 8 de agosto de 1895, Peirce encontrou esse livro em uma livraria e no dia seguinte escreveu uma carta a George Searle desfiando suas fortes reservas sobre a questão da infalibilidade do papa. Essa carta (L 397) é praticamente desconhecida entre os scholars peircianos.Após descrever essas circunstâncias históricas como uma estrutura, o objetivo de meu trabalho será o de descrever os argumentos de Peirce contra a infalibilidade papal, apresentada por George Searle em seu livro, e o contraste entre a atitude genuinamente científica e a noção metafísica putativa da verdade absoluta que está – de acordo com Peirce – por trás da defesa da infalibilidade por parte de Searle. Nesse sentido, o falibilismo de Peirce será explicado com algum detalhe, dando conta também de seu infalibilismo prático.Finalmente, tendo em mente o interesse presente pelas idéias religiosas de Peirce, será sugerido que algumas das idéias de Peirce sobre infalibilidade estão mais perto da compreensão contemporânea desse assunto do que a defesa de Searle.Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo2013-01-31info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://revistas.pucsp.br/index.php/cognitiofilosofia/article/view/13529Cognitio: Revista de Filosofia; Vol. 9 No. 1 (2008); 73-84Cognitio: Revista de Filosofia; v. 9 n. 1 (2008); 73-842316-52781518-7187reponame:Cognitio (São Paulo. Online)instname:Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo (PUC-SP)instacron:PUC_SPenghttps://revistas.pucsp.br/index.php/cognitiofilosofia/article/view/13529/10039Copyright (c) 2013 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessNubiola, Jaime2024-07-01T13:09:34Zoai:ojs.pkp.sfu.ca:article/13529Revistahttps://revistas.pucsp.br/index.php/cognitiofilosofiaPRIhttps://revistas.pucsp.br/index.php/cognitiofilosofia/oairevcognitio@gmail.com2316-52781518-7187opendoar:2024-07-01T13:09:34Cognitio (São Paulo. Online) - Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo (PUC-SP)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
C. S. Peirce and G. M. Searle: The Hoax of Infallibilism C. S. Peirce e G. M. Searle: O Embuste do Infalibilismo |
title |
C. S. Peirce and G. M. Searle: The Hoax of Infallibilism |
spellingShingle |
C. S. Peirce and G. M. Searle: The Hoax of Infallibilism Nubiola, Jaime Falibilismo Infalibilidade Dogma Catolicismo Atitude científica Charles S. Peirce G.M. Searle Fallibilism Infallibility Dogma Catholicism Scientific attitude Charles S. Peirce G.M. Searle |
title_short |
C. S. Peirce and G. M. Searle: The Hoax of Infallibilism |
title_full |
C. S. Peirce and G. M. Searle: The Hoax of Infallibilism |
title_fullStr |
C. S. Peirce and G. M. Searle: The Hoax of Infallibilism |
title_full_unstemmed |
C. S. Peirce and G. M. Searle: The Hoax of Infallibilism |
title_sort |
C. S. Peirce and G. M. Searle: The Hoax of Infallibilism |
author |
Nubiola, Jaime |
author_facet |
Nubiola, Jaime |
author_role |
author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Nubiola, Jaime |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Falibilismo Infalibilidade Dogma Catolicismo Atitude científica Charles S. Peirce G.M. Searle Fallibilism Infallibility Dogma Catholicism Scientific attitude Charles S. Peirce G.M. Searle |
topic |
Falibilismo Infalibilidade Dogma Catolicismo Atitude científica Charles S. Peirce G.M. Searle Fallibilism Infallibility Dogma Catholicism Scientific attitude Charles S. Peirce G.M. Searle |
description |
George M. Searle (1839-1918) and Charles S. Peirce worked together in the Coast Survey and the Harvard Observatory during the decade of 1860: both scientists were assistants of Joseph Winlock, the director of the Observatory. When in 1868 George, a convert to Catholicism, left to enter the Paulist Fathers, he was replaced by his brother Arthur Searle. George was ordained as a priest in 1871, was a lecturer of Mathematics and Astronomy at the Catholic University of America and became the fourth superior general of his congregation from 1904 to 1909. Among the books he wrote intended for non-Catholics was Plain Facts for Fair Minds (1895). On the 8th of August 1895, Peirce found that book in a bookstore and the following day wrote a letter to George Searle expressing strong about papal infallibility. This letter (L 397) is almost unknown amongst Peirce’s scholars.After describing these historical circumstances as a framework, the aim of my paper is to describe Peirce’s arguments against papal infallibility presented by George Searle in his book, and the contrast between the genuine scientific attitude and the putative metaphysical notion of absolute truth that is — according to Peirce — behind Searle’s defense of infallibility. In this sense, Peirce’s fallibilism will be explained with some detail, giving account also of his practical infallibilism.Finally, having in mind the present interest on Peirce’s religious ideas it will be suggested that some of Peirce’s ideas on infallibility are nearer to contemporary understanding of that issue than Searle’s defense. |
publishDate |
2013 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2013-01-31 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://revistas.pucsp.br/index.php/cognitiofilosofia/article/view/13529 |
url |
https://revistas.pucsp.br/index.php/cognitiofilosofia/article/view/13529 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://revistas.pucsp.br/index.php/cognitiofilosofia/article/view/13529/10039 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2013 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2013 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Cognitio: Revista de Filosofia; Vol. 9 No. 1 (2008); 73-84 Cognitio: Revista de Filosofia; v. 9 n. 1 (2008); 73-84 2316-5278 1518-7187 reponame:Cognitio (São Paulo. Online) instname:Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo (PUC-SP) instacron:PUC_SP |
instname_str |
Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo (PUC-SP) |
instacron_str |
PUC_SP |
institution |
PUC_SP |
reponame_str |
Cognitio (São Paulo. Online) |
collection |
Cognitio (São Paulo. Online) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Cognitio (São Paulo. Online) - Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo (PUC-SP) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
revcognitio@gmail.com |
_version_ |
1803387420944629760 |