Home – Home – Jornals – Philosophy of Sciences 2016 number 4

The paper shows that engaging philosophy in solving interdisciplinary problems not only sets new tasks but also opens new opportunities for the development of philosophical knowledge. The author provides justification for using the methods and techniques of philosophical analysis in the solution of interdisciplinary problems. Philosophy in this case can play an integrating role by uniting the approaches of various disciplines and forming a common conceptual basis that would allow the representatives of different sciences to find a common language.

The phenomenon of the rhetorical turn is considered as the third link in the line of the other two theoretical turning points of the development of scientific knowledge in XX century - the linguistic and interpretative turns. The paper discusses the nature of rhetorical turn in relation to the other two, and analyzes its specific features. Among them are a focus on non-disciplinary and meta-disciplinary, more unified arguments, contextuality of methodology, giving greater weight to the principles of Human Sciences and the rejection of the principles of objectivism which are inherent in Cartesian rationality. The paper makes a conclusion about the transition, linked with the rhetorical turn, to a new, communicative type of rationality.

The article analyzes the problem of determining the truth of Godelian sentence in the context of M. Dummett’s semantic argument. N. Tennant’s strategy of avoiding the truth predicate through the deflationary conception of truth is considered in respect to the concept of semantic redundancy. The justification of the truth of Godelian sentence is associated with principles of reflection.

Different theories of de re ascriptions are being discussed in the light of how they do notion specification, if they do. It is shown, that the approach which is not notionally specifying gives such theory of de re ascriptions that it has some implausible consequences, and notionally specifying approach shifts the very understanding of de re ascription.

In the course of the search for the Grand Unification Theory, there happens a change of epistemological standards of experimentation. Which of the two factors primarily influence this change - a social organization of researchers’ teams and relations within them or the nature of the subject of inquiry? We briefly consider how the cognitive status of an experiment, described in terms of such knowledge properties as the objectivity, reliability and validity, changes. We conclude that the transformation of epistemological standards is caused primarily by properties of the subject of inquiry and its epistemological nature.

The paper considers pictures of the world represented in the fundamental physical theories - the classical mechanics, electromagnetic theory, relativity, quantum mechanics, string theory, and the theory of loop quantum gravity. The author shows the laws which scientists use to develop physical models of the world and organizes these laws in the following way: 1) the unification which means an integration of physical categories in a single physical pattern; 2) the simplicity which requires minimizing the number of physical categories; 3) the continuity which means retaining and generalization of the knowledge obtained before; 4) the commentary which is a synthesis of antinomic descriptions of the object; 5) the explanation which means that the physical picture of the world is an explanatory description integrating facts.

The article shows that the conformity principle serves as a factor of unification of physical theories playing both a negative role and a positive one. Its role depends on the purpose of unification which is either an attempt to reduce new data and new conceptions to those which are already accepted or a tendency to elaborating a theory which should include these data and conceptions as a special case. Both situations occur in the course of the development of physical knowledge, but the second one is the most effective in elaborating fundamental theories, while the first one seems to be more reasonable in solving specific scientific problems.

The question of the correctness of the choice of the statistical test, which J. B. Rhine did, is discussed in the article, in connection with the formation of test sequences and with the test procedures. Theoretical study of ways of test sequences generation, and statistical analysis of concrete test sequences that is taken from the protocol of the experiment of 1934, are made. Three ways of test sequences generation: 1) the method based on urn model, random drawings with replacement, 2) the method based on urn model, random drawings without replacement, 3) the method applied by J. B. Rhine, was considered in the article. It is found that the J. B. Rhine’s method provides the independent card extraction trials with uniform probability distribution. It is found that the probability of random guessing of Zener cards in the J. B. Rhine’s experiments depends upon test procedures type (BT 5, BT 25, DT). J. B. Rhine’s Extrasensory perception is examined and discussed with the object to statistical test use. It is found that the applicability of statistical test was chosen by J. B. Rhine, depends upon test procedures type.

The paper reviews the main ideas about geological knowledge beginning with those of the second half of the 19^th century and up to modern ones. We show that in the second half of the 19^th century the philosophical and methodological approach to the problems of geology had a prescriptive character, i.e. it required what geology should be, what it should study and how it should study its subject of inquiry in order to become an exact natural science. In the 20^th century, the philosophy and methodology of geology and geological knowledge focused primarily on understanding the nature of geological methods and proving the scientific character of geology. By analyzing a number of works of both foreign and domestic authors, we revealed two traditions in solving the problem of the scientific nature of geological knowledge; those are Soviet-Russian tradition and British-American one. British-American tradition considers geology to be a historical and interpretative science which interprets outcrops and thus studies the past history of the Earth. Soviet-Russian tradition treats geology as a group of historical and experimental Earth sciences; their methodological specific is complexity. The article deals with the problem of the identification of geological research and prospects of the joint use of historical, hermeneutical and experimental methods in it, as well as a place and a role of each of the three methodological approaches.

The concept of “cognitive unconscious”, widely used in current cognitive psychology, is considered. Main empirical approaches to its investigation are analyzed. Two views on the concept ontology (strong and weak versions of the unconscious) are stated. Finally, the article notes that theoretical consideration of the unconscious has to pay respect to the fact that unconscious and consciousness are genetically related to each other.

Basing on the analysis of physical, astronomical, mathematical and philosophical facts, the article explains why neither Kepler’s predecessors, nor his contemporaries could discover the laws of planetary motion. The generalization of a concrete historical material helps to make evident why in the Antiquity (Pythagoras, Plato, Aristotle, Democritus, Archimedes, Aristarchus, Apollonius, Hipparchus, Ptolemy, etc.), the Middle Ages and the Renaissance (Nicholas of Cusa, Leonardo da Vinci, Copernicus, Ramus, Giordano Bruno, Tycho Brahe, Galilei, etc.) scientists failed to do it. The author proves the approach to understanding and explaining Kepler’s scientific work which bases on the idea of various types of induction by Leonardo da Vinci, G. Galilei, F. Bacon, etc.) and explains why it was Kepler who developed the inductive method of calculation which made possible to discover the laws of planetary motion.

The article suggests a new scientometric indicator, viz the index of a scientist’s publication activity and the relevance of his or her publications (the PAIVPU index, or the PA-index). The author presents her formula of determining the PAIVPU index, considers parameters of its regularities, recommends how to do a non-automatic calculation of the index, and describes a field where it may be used. In the author’s view, an annual monitoring of the PAIVPU index should stimulate scientists to be more active in publishing their works.