For and against method: the tension between rationalism and epistemological anarquism in the Big Bang against Steady State controversy
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2020 |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | por |
Título da fonte: | Caderno Brasileiro de Ensino de Física (Online) |
Texto Completo: | https://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/fisica/article/view/73526 |
Resumo: | With the growth of naive and critical views about science and its authority, it is natural to question educational proposals that may further promote relativism. In view of this risk, based on studies on the history of cosmology in the first half of the 20th century, it is argued that it is pertinent to include controversies about the nature of science in science education. For that, are presented and discussed two antagonistic views of philosophers of science about the change in scientific theories: the critical rationalism of Imre Lakatos and the epistemological anarchism of Paul Feyerabend. They were used to create two synthesis of the history of cosmology: first a rational reconstruction of history and then, a history with greater space for the plurality of theories, including the presence of factors currently considered irrational in science. In conclusion, it is argued that this type of controversy has the potential to prevent the growth of naive views about science, both based on excessive trust in the specialists’ authority, as well as a radicalization of the distrust of any authority. |
id |
UFSC-19_9565da7045984df2f7c847b77a75a257 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:periodicos.ufsc.br:article/73526 |
network_acronym_str |
UFSC-19 |
network_name_str |
Caderno Brasileiro de Ensino de Física (Online) |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
For and against method: the tension between rationalism and epistemological anarquism in the Big Bang against Steady State controversyA favor e contra o método: a tensão entre racionalismo e anarquismo epistemológico na controvérsia entre Big Bang e Estado EstacionárioWith the growth of naive and critical views about science and its authority, it is natural to question educational proposals that may further promote relativism. In view of this risk, based on studies on the history of cosmology in the first half of the 20th century, it is argued that it is pertinent to include controversies about the nature of science in science education. For that, are presented and discussed two antagonistic views of philosophers of science about the change in scientific theories: the critical rationalism of Imre Lakatos and the epistemological anarchism of Paul Feyerabend. They were used to create two synthesis of the history of cosmology: first a rational reconstruction of history and then, a history with greater space for the plurality of theories, including the presence of factors currently considered irrational in science. In conclusion, it is argued that this type of controversy has the potential to prevent the growth of naive views about science, both based on excessive trust in the specialists’ authority, as well as a radicalization of the distrust of any authority.Dado o crescimento de visões ingênuas e críticas à ciência e sua autoridade, é natural que se questione as propostas educacionais que possam fomentar ainda mais um relativismo. Tendo em vista esse risco, com base em estudos sobre história da cosmologia na primeira metade do século XX, argumenta-se a pertinência de se incluir controvérsias sobre a natureza da ciência na educação científica. Para isso, são apresentadas e discutidas duas visões antagônicas de filósofos da ciência sobre a mudança das teorias científicas: o racionalismo crítico de Imre Lakatos e o anarquismo epistemológico de Paul Feyerabend. Elas foram empregadas para criar duas sínteses de obras sobre a história da cosmologia: primeiro uma reconstrução racional da história e em seguida uma história com maior espaço para a pluralidade de teorias, incluindo a presença de fatores usualmente considerados não racionais na ciência. Como conclusão, se propõe que este tipo de controvérsia tem potencial para evitar que continuem aumentando visões ingênuas sobre a ciência, tanto baseadas em uma confiança excessiva na autoridade de especialistas, quanto de uma radicalização da desconfiança de qualquer autoridade.Imprensa Universitária - UFSC2020-12-16info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/fisica/article/view/7352610.5007/2175-7941.2020v37n3p1250Caderno Brasileiro de Ensino de Física; v. 37 n. 3 (2020); 1250-12772175-79411677-2334reponame:Caderno Brasileiro de Ensino de Física (Online)instname:Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC)instacron:UFSCporhttps://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/fisica/article/view/73526/44883Copyright (c) 2020 Caderno Brasileiro de Ensino de Físicainfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessBagdonas, Alexandre2020-12-16T19:14:15Zoai:periodicos.ufsc.br:article/73526Revistahttp://www.periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/fisicaPUBhttps://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/fisica/oaicbefisica@gmail.com||fscccef@fsc.ufsc.br|| cbefisica@gmail.com2175-79411677-2334opendoar:2020-12-16T19:14:15Caderno Brasileiro de Ensino de Física (Online) - Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
For and against method: the tension between rationalism and epistemological anarquism in the Big Bang against Steady State controversy A favor e contra o método: a tensão entre racionalismo e anarquismo epistemológico na controvérsia entre Big Bang e Estado Estacionário |
title |
For and against method: the tension between rationalism and epistemological anarquism in the Big Bang against Steady State controversy |
spellingShingle |
For and against method: the tension between rationalism and epistemological anarquism in the Big Bang against Steady State controversy Bagdonas, Alexandre |
title_short |
For and against method: the tension between rationalism and epistemological anarquism in the Big Bang against Steady State controversy |
title_full |
For and against method: the tension between rationalism and epistemological anarquism in the Big Bang against Steady State controversy |
title_fullStr |
For and against method: the tension between rationalism and epistemological anarquism in the Big Bang against Steady State controversy |
title_full_unstemmed |
For and against method: the tension between rationalism and epistemological anarquism in the Big Bang against Steady State controversy |
title_sort |
For and against method: the tension between rationalism and epistemological anarquism in the Big Bang against Steady State controversy |
author |
Bagdonas, Alexandre |
author_facet |
Bagdonas, Alexandre |
author_role |
author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Bagdonas, Alexandre |
description |
With the growth of naive and critical views about science and its authority, it is natural to question educational proposals that may further promote relativism. In view of this risk, based on studies on the history of cosmology in the first half of the 20th century, it is argued that it is pertinent to include controversies about the nature of science in science education. For that, are presented and discussed two antagonistic views of philosophers of science about the change in scientific theories: the critical rationalism of Imre Lakatos and the epistemological anarchism of Paul Feyerabend. They were used to create two synthesis of the history of cosmology: first a rational reconstruction of history and then, a history with greater space for the plurality of theories, including the presence of factors currently considered irrational in science. In conclusion, it is argued that this type of controversy has the potential to prevent the growth of naive views about science, both based on excessive trust in the specialists’ authority, as well as a radicalization of the distrust of any authority. |
publishDate |
2020 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2020-12-16 |
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://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/fisica/article/view/73526 10.5007/2175-7941.2020v37n3p1250 |
url |
https://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/fisica/article/view/73526 |
identifier_str_mv |
10.5007/2175-7941.2020v37n3p1250 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
por |
language |
por |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/fisica/article/view/73526/44883 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2020 Caderno Brasileiro de Ensino de Física info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2020 Caderno Brasileiro de Ensino de Física |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Imprensa Universitária - UFSC |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Imprensa Universitária - UFSC |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Caderno Brasileiro de Ensino de Física; v. 37 n. 3 (2020); 1250-1277 2175-7941 1677-2334 reponame:Caderno Brasileiro de Ensino de Física (Online) instname:Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC) instacron:UFSC |
instname_str |
Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC) |
instacron_str |
UFSC |
institution |
UFSC |
reponame_str |
Caderno Brasileiro de Ensino de Física (Online) |
collection |
Caderno Brasileiro de Ensino de Física (Online) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Caderno Brasileiro de Ensino de Física (Online) - Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
cbefisica@gmail.com||fscccef@fsc.ufsc.br|| cbefisica@gmail.com |
_version_ |
1799940574819647488 |