Везде
Conception and Philosophy of Science
Table of contents
Annotation Estimate Publication content
References Comments
Share
QR
Metrics
Conception and Philosophy of Science
Annotation
PII
S1811-833X0000616-7-1
Publication type
Article
Status
Published
Authors
Alexander Shvyrkov  Dmitry Koshlakov
Edition
Volume 57 Issue 2
Pages
124-141
Abstract
The authors try to show that even Wittgensteinian definition of concept is not always sufficient to analyze what really happens in science. As a result, in addition to “concept” we propose “conception” as a new promising tool for philosophy of science. The authors provide a brief historical analysis of this term and reveal two main interpretations of “conception” in philosophy and scientific disciplines. In accordance with the first view, conception appears as either a “twin” of the concept, or a pair entity to the concept. According to the second view, conception is a kind of “strange concept” that exists among “normal” concepts. Since conception is understood differently in sciences and philosophical systems, it is not possible to give a generalized definition of conception. That is, it is impossible to formulate this definition, so to speak, inductively. Moreover, even if it was possible, such a definition would not necessarily have to be automatically accepted by philosophy of science. That is why the introduction of a concept of conception was carried out through the analysis of a global process associated with the return of metaphysics to science. We define conception as a semantic construction denoting the unknown (and, possibly, fundamentally unknowable) and ensuring the possibility of working with this unknown (unknowable). By virtue of the way conception was introduced (conception is not a “generalization” of the interpretations available in specific sciences) many conceptions that are considered as conception in specific sciences turn out to not to be concepts within this definition. Thus, the article interprets concept as a new possible tool of philosophy of science, which is aimed at understanding how specific sciences develop.
Keywords
concept, conception, unknowable, metaphysics, philosophy of science, science
Date of publication
01.06.2020
Number of purchasers
22
Views
479
Readers community rating
0.0 (0 votes)
Cite Download pdf

References



Additional sources and materials

    

  1. Antonovski, A.Yu. “Ponimanie i vzaimoponimanie v nauchnoi kommunikatsii” [Understanding and Mutual Understanding in Scientific Communication”, Voprosy filosofii, 2015, no. 2, pp. 45‒69.
    2. 

  2. Askol'dov-Alekseyev, S.A. “Kontsept i slovo” [Concept and Word], Rus. rech'. Novaya seriya [Russian Speech. New Series], no. 2, Leningrad, 1928, pp. 28‒44. (in Russian).
    3. 

  3. Barash, R.E., Antonovski, A.Yu. “O nauke Maksa Vebera: retseptsiya i sovremennost” [Max Weber on Science: Reception and Perspectives], Epistemology & Philosophy of Science, 2018, vol. 55, no. 4, pp. 174‒188.
    4. 

  4. Carey, S. “Science Education as Conceptual Change”, Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 2000, no 21(1), pp. 13‒19.
    5. 

  5. Carey, S. The Origin of Concepts. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009, 608 pp.
    6. 

  6. Deleuze, G., Guattari, P.-F. Chto takoye filosofiya? [What is Philosophy?]. Moscow: Akademicheskiy Proyekt, 2009, 261 pp. (in Russian)
    7. 

  7. Filatov, V.P. et al. Obsuzhdaem statyi o konstruktivizme [Discussing Articles on Constructivism], Epistemology & Philosophy of Science, 2009, vol. ХХ, no 2, pp. 142‒156. (in Russian).
    8. 

  8. Filatova, A.A. Kontsept kak konstituiruyushchiy element kul'tury (kognitivnyy podkhod) [Concept as a Constituent Element of Culture (Cognitive Approach). PhD Thesis]: diss. kand. filos. nauk: 24.00.01, 09.00.01, Rostov-on-Don, 2007, 179 pp. (In Russian).
    9. 

  9. Fodor, J. Concepts: Where Cognitive Science Went Wrong. New York: Oxford University Press, 1998, 174 pp.
    10. 

  10. Fodor, J., Lepore, E. “The Red Herring and the Pet Fish: Why Concepts Still Can't Be Prototypes”, Cognition, 1996, no 58, pp. 253‒270.
    11. 

  11. Gelman, S. The Essential Child: Origins of Essentialism in Everyday Thought. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003, 392 pp.
    12. 

  12. Gopnik, A., Meltzoff A. Words, Thoughts, and Theories. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1997, 350 pp.
    13. 

  13. Ivanov, A.V., Fotiyeva, I.V., Shishin, M.Yu. “Metafizicheskiye osnovaniya sovremennoy nauki” [Metaphysical Foundations of Modern Science], Metafizika [Metaphysics], 2011, no 1, pp. 154‒168. (in Russian).
    14. 

  14. Kasavin, I.T., Porus, V.N. “Sovremennaya epistemologiya i yeye kritiki” [Modern Epistemology and its Critics], Epistemology & Philosophy of Science, 2018, vol. 55, no 4, pp. 8‒25. (in Russian).
    15. 

  15. Lektorsky, V.A. et. al. “Konstruktivizm v epistemologii i naukakh o cheloveke (Materialy kruglogo stola)” [Constructivism in Epistemology and the Humanities. Materials of the Round Table], Vorposy filosofii, 2008, no. 3, pp. 3‒36. (in Russian)
    16. 

  16. Keil, F. Concepts, Kinds, and Cognitive Development. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1989, 165 pp.
    17. 

  17. Likhachev, D.S. “Kontseptosfera russkogo yazyka” [The Conceptual Sphere of the Russian Language], in: Likhachev, D.S. Izbrannyye trudy po russkoy i mirovoy kul'ture [Selected Works on Russian and World Culture]. Saint Petersburg: SPbGUP, 2015, pp. 493‒505. (In Russian).
    18. 

  18. Luhmann, N. “Evolyutsiya nauki” [Evolution of Science], Epistemology & Philosophy of Science, 2017, vol. 52, no. 2, pp. 215‒233. (in Russian)
    19. 

  19. Makarenko, V.P. “Politicheskaya kontseptologiya: pervyye itogi razrabotki” [Political Conceptology: First Results of Development], Politicheskaya kontseptologiya [Political Conceptology], 2009, no 1, pp. 79‒116. (in Russian).
    20. 

  20. Masalova, S.I. Filosofskiye kontsepty kak regulyativy gibkoy ratsional'nosti: Transformatsiya ot antichnosti do Novogo vremeni [Philosophical Concepts as Regulators of Flexible Rationality: Transformation from Antiquity to Modern Times]: avtoref… d-ra filos. nauk: 19.00.08, Rostov-on-Don, 2007, 382 p. (In Russian).
    21. 

  21. Medvedev, V.I. “Vitgenshteyn i transtsendentalizm: stoit li govorit' o tom, o chem govorit' nel'zya?” [Wittgenstein and Transcendentalism: is it Worth Talking about What You Can Not Talk about?], Credo New, 2010, no 4. URL: http://www.intelros.ru/readroom/credo_new/credo_4_2010/7767-vitgenshtejn-i-transcendentalizm-stoit-li-govorit-o-tom-o-chem-govorit-nelzya.html (дата обращения: 10.12.2019) (in Russian).
    22. 

  22. Mikeshina, L.A. Filosofiya poznaniya. Polemicheskiye glavy [Philosophy of Knowledge. Polemic Chapters]. Moscow: Progress-Traditsiya, 2002, 624 pp. (In Russian).
    23. 

  23. Millikan, R. On Clear and Confused Ideas. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000, 276 pp.
    24. 

  24. Momdzhyan, K. Kh., et.al. “Sistemno-teoreticheskii podkhod k ob"yasneniyu sotsial'noi real'nosti. Filosofskaya ili sotsiologicheskaya metodologiya?” [Systematic Theoretical Approach to the Explanation of The Social Reality. Philosophical or Sociological Methodology?], Voprosy filosofii, 2016, no. 1, pp. 17‒42. (in Russian)
    25. 

  25. Neretina, S.S. Slovo i tekst v srednevekovoy kul'ture. Kontseptualizm Abelyara [Word and Text in Medieval Culture. Abelard's Conceptualism], Moscow: Gnozis, 1994, 216 pp. in Russian).
    26. 

  26. Neretina, S.S., Ogurtsov A.P. Kontsepty politicheskoy kul'tury [Conceptions of Political Culture]. Moscow: IFRAN, 2011, 279 pp. (In Russian).
    27. 

  27. Pruzhinin, B.I. et.al. “Kommunikatsii v nauke: epistemologicheskie, sotsiokul'turnye, infrastrukturnye aspekty. Materialy‘kruglogo stola’” [Communications in Science: Epistemological, Socio-cultural and Infrastructural Aspects. Materials of the Round Table], Voprosy filosofii, 2017, no. 11, pp. 23‒57.
    28. 

  28. Ratnikov, V.S. “Metodologicheskoye soznaniye sovremennoy nauki: na puti k «myagkoy» metodologii” [Methodological Consciousness of Modern Science: on the Way to a “Soft” Methodology], Kul'tura narodov Prichernomor'ya [Culture of the Peoples of the Black Sea], 2007, no 106, pp. 96‒99. (in Russian).
    29. 

  29. Rosch, E. “Principles of Categorization”, in: E. Rosch & B. Lloyd (eds.). Cognition and Categorization. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1978, pp. 27‒48.
    30. 

  30. Rosch, E., Mervis, C. “Family Resemblances: Studies in the Internal Structure of Categories”, Cognitive Psychology, 1975, no 7, pp. 573‒605.
    31. 

  31. Stepanov, Yu.S. Kontsepty. Tonkaya plenka tsivilizatsii [Conceptions. Thin Skin of Civilization.], Moscow: Yazyki slavyanskikh kul'tur, 2007, 248 pp. (in Russian).
    32. 

  32. Schleiermacher, F. “Iz sochineniya‘Nechayannye mysli o dukhe nemetskikh universitetov’” [Gelegentliche Gedanken über den Universitäten in Deutschland], Epistemology & Philosophy of Science, 2018, vol. 55, no. 1, pp. 215‒235
    33. 

  33. Shvirkov, O.Í. Problema shtuchnogo íntelektu ta lyudinovimírníst' shtuchnikh íntelektual'nikh system [The Problem of Artificial Intelligence and Man-madeness of Artificial Intelligence Systems]: dis… kand. fílos. nauk: 09.00.09. Kiev, 2006, 170 p. (in Ukrainian).
    34. 

  34. Shvyrkov, A.I. Politicheskaya teoriya, diskurs i real'nost': predvaritel'nyy analiz vzaimootnosheniy [Political Theory, Discourse and Reality: A Preliminary Analysis of the Relationship], Polis. Politicheskiye issledovaniya [Policy. Political Studies], 2016, no 5, pp. 66‒79. (In Russian).
    35. 

  35. Wittgenstein, L. “Filosofskiye issledovaniya [Philosophical Studies] in YAzyki kak obraz mira” [Languages as an Image of the World]. Moscow: AST; St. Petersburg: Terra Fantastica, 2003, pp. 220‒548.
    36. 

  36. Vladimirov, Yu.S. “Fundamental'naya teoreticheskaya fizika i metafizika” [Fundamental Theoretical Physics and Metaphysics], Metafizika [Metaphysics], 2011, no 1, pp. 88‒105. (In Russian).
    37. 

  37. Vladimirov, Yu.S. “Printsipy metafiziki i kvantovaya mekhanika” [Principles of Metaphysics and Quantum Mechanics], Metafizika [Metaphysics], 2017, no 1(23), pp. 8‒32. (in Russian).
    38. 

  38. Vorkachev, S.G. Schast'ye kak lingvokul'turnyy kontsept [Happiness as a Linguocultural Concept], Moscow: Gnozis, 2004, 192 pp. (in Russian).
    39. 

  39. Vorkachev, S.G. Anglica selecta: izbrannyye raboty po lingvokontseptologii [Anglica Selecta: Selected Works on Linguoconceptology]. Volgograd: Paradigma, 2012, 205 pp. (in Russian).
    40. 

  40. Yefremov, V.A. “Teoriya kontsepta i kontseptual'noye prostranstvo” [Conception Theory and Conceptual Space], Izvestiya Rossiyskogo gosudarstvennogo pedagogicheskogo universiteta im. A.I. Gertsena [News of A.I. Herzen Russian State Pedagogical University], 2009, no 104, pp. 96‒105. (In Russian).
    41. 

  41. Zakharov, V.D. “Metafizika i fizika geometricheskikh prostranstv” [Metaphysics and Physics of Geometric Spaces], Metafizika [Metaphysics], 2011, no 2(2), pp. 5‒29. (In Russian).
    42. 

  42. Zenkin, S. “Poslesloviye perevodchika” [The Translator's Afterword], in: Deleuze G., Gvattari F. Chto takoye filosofiya? [What is Philosophy?]. Moscow: Akademicheskiy Proyekt, 2009, pp. 281‒286. (in Russian).
    43.

Comments

No posts found

Write a review
Translate