Periodically, I would make the attempt to get a response that proceeds from the reflections of fellow researchers in RG Questions and Answers section.
It is no longer required to take the lead where progress drives; it seems to me that what is needed, instead, is a real full capacity to see whether the future is headed more than ever towards shared cultural roots.
As stated by the mathematician and epistemologist Federigo Enriques "the progress of science is a process where the deductions partially verified and contradictions eliminating the error of implicit assumptions, arise new inductions more precise, more likely, larger “. Excessive optimism about progress, its forms and tools of domain of history caused (and still cause) significant reactions of disapproval. The idea that the changes require scientific criticism to philosophical reason is contrasted by the opposite one that progress requires a philosophical conception whereby there is the problem of limits of reason. It prevailed increasingly until the philosophical and historical criticism could concentrate on tasks, limits, methods and conditions of the scientific rationality. It brought to light the ambiguity and problematic nature of the concept of progress, in both a general sense for the human history, and specific for science and technology.
In the last century, the relationship between the progress of science and the human condition focused the question of whether science can be said to be an evolution in itself or only with respect to a general human progression. In the face of scientific knowledge more numerous, extensive and rigorous than in the past, we wondered which consisted in their development and how to evaluate it. The debate moved from a ‘generic’ progress of science, to a more concrete and specific advancement in the ‘individual’ ones.
The natural, human and social sciences become privileged partners for culture. After Popper, Kuhn and other critical epistemologists, ‘thought’ is more credible as they developed self-criticism, the awareness of their limitations, the perception of their own mistakes.
No address - epistemological and philosophical - is decisive and irreversible. The critical reassessment covers all areas: science, epistemology, philosophy. In the transition, the new ways of interpreting and implementing science are overcoming old prejudices. At stake there is also a more human science at the service of man, of culture, of a new humanism and quality of life.
What is clear from the debate of recent years is that the issue of epistemological unification can not ignore the fact that in all groups of sciences - physical, natural, human and social – there are, in greater or lesser degree, the elements and the cognitive moments that constitute the method. The fundamental tools and models that underpin the unity of knowledge, are not exclusive of any group of sciences, nor of any discipline. Ultimately, their unity is based more on those than on method, while their diversity derives from their specific end of knowledge that forms the objects.
Sciences, therefore, are related to their context that includes, on the one hand the pre-scientific knowledge of the reality that, as sensible, must be respected, on the other hand the plurality of interests and cognitive knowledge. Scientific truths are, at the same time absolute and incomplete, that is to say, in part undeniable and definitive and in part to be completed and overcome.
All this is related to the difficulties involving each science: 1) the rapid overcoming of scientific knowledge; 2) the continued fragmentation caused by increasing specialization.
The solution of these problems depends on the meaning that each discipline gives to its statements. In this regard, all the more useful are the epistemological proposals of the twentieth century (eg. Popper, Hempel, Rudner, Kuhn, Lakatos).
I notice that there are deepening the scope of some structural limits without mitigating complexity and difficulty and, in particular: 1) the scientific process and the results thereof for building a new culture and humanism based on science; 2) the logic of science, its informative and executive criteria, its method and its techniques; 3) compliance of techno-scientific activity to the most important needs of people and society.
To these decisive problems, a culture torn between modern scientist rationalism and postmodern weak thought does not offer solutions. Emerge from a large number of Questions and Answers proposals: a) to combine the authentic values of techno-scientific culture with those of the great cultural traditions; b) welding knowledge with wisdom, opening it to the universal ad supreme values of ‘good’ and ‘truth'.
I remember in the sixties as north american the word ''progress'' was undeniable and synonymous with total faith in our future , a bright future not only for us in north america but for the whole world as science and technology will advance and spread to the whole of humanity. We did not even had any ideas yet of the amazing technologies that we have seen appearing and transforming our world. But more than half a century has passed, science and technology has progressed but not the hope for humanity it used to be the insurance.
If historical & philosophical criticism come to our surface of our MIND ,in this line we have in an impartial way to study
the criticism in a right manner .This would help us to avoid any ambiguities & mis conception of our Mind .
For our progressive line of action we have to cultivate & to view the criticism in the sense that if it is not affected
our way of thinking & even if this be show ,whether the criticism is notfor our EGO , whatever the area of our activities or even
our social surroundings different of opinion very often result into criticism & as such we have to decide the right course of
action for our MIND.
This is my personal opiniion
Dear Artur,
Thank you for your contribution. I wish to concentrate on your following statement which I share: “Every generation has to learn its own lessons by themselves….” I go on with my personal thought recalling what Vera Vignani Jarach told us in a film by the title: “Il rumore della memoria” (The noise of memory) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H8f59l0gTk4.
Vera Vigevani Jarach fled to ten years with family from Milan, which was beginning to experience the drama of the Holocaust and the racial laws, was found almost 40 years later, on June 27, 1976, invested by the huge pain of seeing kidnapped and then tortured and killed the daughter Franca 18 years, during the dictatorship of Videla in Argentina.
Vera said: "History does not teach us anything (emphasis added). What happened continues to repeat itself in small and large situations. That is why we must not forget, but remain on alert to prevent anything happen yet. It's not over yet. "
I think there will be occasions to develop the concept: “….we need a reset in order to start from the new again”.
Best wishes, Gianrocco
History is not something that is given to us. Some historian have tried to understand what happened and have wrote some stories about that and these are given to us. But those of interpretations of what happened, not what happen. Each generation repeat this process of interpretation again in the light of the new way this generation is thinking. Even our own personal life history is not given to us. We have to create our own history by reflecting onto our life and try to make sense of it. The way I see my youth and my life history is regularly changing. Events that I alway did remember but did not knew their importance in light of the more recent events and reflection can something become much more important status in my life. The ''Know Thyself'' is the ''Know your history''. The more one look at his how story and the more one realize that his own history is intimatly mesh in the history of his city, nation, civilisation, humanity, evolution of life,evolution of the cosmos. Knowing more of all that exist is knowing more about thyself in an intimate way and important way. During our youth we are enculturated and through this process the balance of dynamic power sustaining our consciousness get programmed and reflect the major civilisational events which has established these into the culture we are enculturated. So when struggling personnally with the conflict within ourself , we are actually struggling with values established in the historical processes. This insight cannot be realized if one does not start study the History, does not read litterature or experience ancient arts; it is precious for the interpretation of this history.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Philosophy
- Philosophy Of Science
- Reasoning