Advertisement

From Science Wars to Science Worries: Some Reflections on the Scientific Conquest of Reality

  • Johannes Roggenhofer
Chapter
Part of the The Frontiers Collection book series (FRONTCOLL)

Abstract

The Science Wars are taken to have more significance than just that of exposing unbecoming metaphors. The relation between science, reality, and social practice is seen as the core problem of the debate. Neither relativism nor realism have come up with satisfactory solutions to the problem. It is argued that science has a special relation to reality, making its results partially independent of social practice. This relation isolates the part of reality it investigates, thereby constituting this part as non-intentional nature. Which phenomena belong to the domain of science in the end is a matter of social acceptance and not of scientific discovery. Science cannot claim to be the ultimate judge of reality in general. It is a particular generator of knowledge and orientation besides others like the humanities, art, or religion which have their own creative forces.

Keywords

Social Practice Social Acceptance Symbolic Form Privileged Access Scientific Term 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Bloor, David (1976), Knowledge and Social Imagery. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  2. Canguikhem, Georges (1979), “Der Gegenstand der Wissenschaftsgeschichte.” In: Wissenschaftsgeschichte und Epistemologie. Gesammelte Aufsätze. Hrsg. v. Wolfgang Lepenies. Frankfurt/Main: Suhrkamp, pp. 22–37 [First published in 1966 ].Google Scholar
  3. Cassurer, Ernst (1972), An Essay on Man: An Introduction to a Philosophy of Human Culture. New Haven: Yale University Press [First published in 1944 ].Google Scholar
  4. Diltheu, Wilhelm (1910), Der Aufbau der geschichtlichen Welt in den Geisteswis-senschaften. Berlin: Verlag der Koeniglichen Akademie der Wissenschaften. GLOCK, HANS JOHANN (2000), “Imposters, Bunglers and Relativists.” In: PETERS et al. (eds.; 2000 ), pp. 249–269.Google Scholar
  5. Layour, Bruno (1987): Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers through Society. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Peters, Susanne, Michael Biddiss and IAN F. ROE (eds.; 2000 ): The Humanities in the New Millenium. Tübingen: Francke Verlag.Google Scholar
  7. Rickert, Heinrich (6/71926), Kulturwissenschaft und Naturwissenschaft. Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr (Paul Siebeck) [Re-edition: Stuttgart: Reclam 1986]. ROGGENHOFER, JOHANNES (1992), Zum Sprachdenken Georg Christoph Lichtenbergs. Tübingen: Niemeyer [Linguistische Arbeiten, vol. 275].Google Scholar
  8. Rorty, Richers (1991a), Objectivity, Relativism, and Truth. Philosophical Papers, Volume I. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Rorty, Richard (1991b), “Is Natural Science a Natural Kind?” In: RORTY ( 1991 ), pp. 423–462.Google Scholar
  10. Rorty, Richard (1993), Eine Kultur ohne Zentrum: Vier philosophische Essays. Stuttgart: Reclam.Google Scholar
  11. Soal, Alan D. (1996), “Transgressing the Boundaries: Toward a Trans-formative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity.” Social Text, vol. 46 /47, pp. 217–252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Sokal, Alam D. and Jean Bricmont (1997), Impostures intellectuelles. Paris: Odile Jacob [English translation: `Intellectual Impostures: Postmodern Philosophers’ Abuse of Science’. London: Profile Books, 1998. Published in the US and Canada under the title `Fashionable Nonsense: Postmodern Intellectuals’ Abuse of Science’. New York: Picador, 1998. Published in German under the title ‘Eleganter Unsinn: Wie die Denker der Postmoderne die Wissenschaft missbrauchen’. München: C. H. Beck, 1999 ].Google Scholar
  13. Verene, Donald P. (1993), “Metaphysical Narration, Science, and Symbolic Form,” Review of Metaphysics, vol. 47 (September), pp. 115–132.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Johannes Roggenhofer

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations