Some remarks about philosophy and its relation to the empirical sciences

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Ros, Arno
Data de Publicação: 2016
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: por
Título da fonte: Manuscrito (Online)
Texto Completo: https://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/manuscrito/article/view/8644599
Resumo: There are currently two different views about the relation between philosophy and the empirical sciences. One of them – the “Quinean” view – holds that there is only a difference in degree: both are trying to gain insights in parts of the world, but philosophy, in opposition to the empirical sciences, which deal with concrete parts of the world, tries to find out insights of a very general type. The other view – which has a century old history, beginning with Socrates/Plato and ending, in a certain sense, with the late Wittgenstein – holds that philosophy and the empirical sciences are separated by a sharp categorical difference: Empirical sciences deal with parts of the world, and philosophy deals with concepts, that is with our habits of distinguishing and classifying things, which enable us to deal empirically with the world. This paper tries to develop some arguments in favour of the second view, and, furthermore, tries to suggest some implications of this view. One of these implications is that there are three special tasks of philosophy as a concept-reflecting enterprise: the descriptive, the explanatory and the critical. It is remarkable to see that within these aims empirical insights come again to play a certain, although limited role.
id UNICAMP-17_e112349af5b21571ac27ae9801628d75
oai_identifier_str oai:ojs.periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br:article/8644599
network_acronym_str UNICAMP-17
network_name_str Manuscrito (Online)
repository_id_str
spelling Some remarks about philosophy and its relation to the empirical sciencesThere are currently two different views about the relation between philosophy and the empirical sciences. One of them – the “Quinean” view – holds that there is only a difference in degree: both are trying to gain insights in parts of the world, but philosophy, in opposition to the empirical sciences, which deal with concrete parts of the world, tries to find out insights of a very general type. The other view – which has a century old history, beginning with Socrates/Plato and ending, in a certain sense, with the late Wittgenstein – holds that philosophy and the empirical sciences are separated by a sharp categorical difference: Empirical sciences deal with parts of the world, and philosophy deals with concepts, that is with our habits of distinguishing and classifying things, which enable us to deal empirically with the world. This paper tries to develop some arguments in favour of the second view, and, furthermore, tries to suggest some implications of this view. One of these implications is that there are three special tasks of philosophy as a concept-reflecting enterprise: the descriptive, the explanatory and the critical. It is remarkable to see that within these aims empirical insights come again to play a certain, although limited role.Universidade Estadual de Campinas2016-03-29info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/manuscrito/article/view/8644599Manuscrito: Revista Internacional de Filosofia; v. 25 n. 2 (2002): Jul./Dez.; 489-512Manuscrito: International Journal of Philosophy; Vol. 25 No. 2 (2002): Jul./Dez.; 489-512Manuscrito: Revista Internacional de Filosofía; Vol. 25 Núm. 2 (2002): Jul./Dez.; 489-5122317-630Xreponame:Manuscrito (Online)instname:Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP)instacron:UNICAMPporhttps://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/manuscrito/article/view/8644599/11980Copyright (c) 2002 Manuscritoinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessRos, Arno2016-03-29T16:22:51Zoai:ojs.periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br:article/8644599Revistahttps://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/manuscritoPUBhttps://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/manuscrito/oaimwrigley@cle.unicamp.br|| dascal@spinoza.tau.ac.il||publicacoes@cle.unicamp.br2317-630X0100-6045opendoar:2016-03-29T16:22:51Manuscrito (Online) - Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Some remarks about philosophy and its relation to the empirical sciences
title Some remarks about philosophy and its relation to the empirical sciences
spellingShingle Some remarks about philosophy and its relation to the empirical sciences
Ros, Arno
title_short Some remarks about philosophy and its relation to the empirical sciences
title_full Some remarks about philosophy and its relation to the empirical sciences
title_fullStr Some remarks about philosophy and its relation to the empirical sciences
title_full_unstemmed Some remarks about philosophy and its relation to the empirical sciences
title_sort Some remarks about philosophy and its relation to the empirical sciences
author Ros, Arno
author_facet Ros, Arno
author_role author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Ros, Arno
description There are currently two different views about the relation between philosophy and the empirical sciences. One of them – the “Quinean” view – holds that there is only a difference in degree: both are trying to gain insights in parts of the world, but philosophy, in opposition to the empirical sciences, which deal with concrete parts of the world, tries to find out insights of a very general type. The other view – which has a century old history, beginning with Socrates/Plato and ending, in a certain sense, with the late Wittgenstein – holds that philosophy and the empirical sciences are separated by a sharp categorical difference: Empirical sciences deal with parts of the world, and philosophy deals with concepts, that is with our habits of distinguishing and classifying things, which enable us to deal empirically with the world. This paper tries to develop some arguments in favour of the second view, and, furthermore, tries to suggest some implications of this view. One of these implications is that there are three special tasks of philosophy as a concept-reflecting enterprise: the descriptive, the explanatory and the critical. It is remarkable to see that within these aims empirical insights come again to play a certain, although limited role.
publishDate 2016
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2016-03-29
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.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/manuscrito/article/view/8644599
url https://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/manuscrito/article/view/8644599
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv por
language por
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://periodicos.sbu.unicamp.br/ojs/index.php/manuscrito/article/view/8644599/11980
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv Copyright (c) 2002 Manuscrito
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv Copyright (c) 2002 Manuscrito
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidade Estadual de Campinas
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidade Estadual de Campinas
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Manuscrito: Revista Internacional de Filosofia; v. 25 n. 2 (2002): Jul./Dez.; 489-512
Manuscrito: International Journal of Philosophy; Vol. 25 No. 2 (2002): Jul./Dez.; 489-512
Manuscrito: Revista Internacional de Filosofía; Vol. 25 Núm. 2 (2002): Jul./Dez.; 489-512
2317-630X
reponame:Manuscrito (Online)
instname:Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP)
instacron:UNICAMP
instname_str Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP)
instacron_str UNICAMP
institution UNICAMP
reponame_str Manuscrito (Online)
collection Manuscrito (Online)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Manuscrito (Online) - Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv mwrigley@cle.unicamp.br|| dascal@spinoza.tau.ac.il||publicacoes@cle.unicamp.br
_version_ 1800216566226223104