Возвращаясь к Т. Куну: консервативна ли «нормальная наука»?.
Alexandre Koyré and Pierre Duhem developed contrasting arguments on the preconditions of the Scientifi c Revolution. Duhem saw the articles of condemnation of 1277 as the motivation for medieval scholars to reconsider Aristotles natural philosophy and to look for alternatives, such as impetus physics, which led toward later works by Galileo. Koyrй, however, rejected any contribution of the Paris condemnations to the development of modern science, and he offered a contrasting interpretation of the 13th-century texts that discussed the possible existence of empty space outside the World. The two radically different views on the progress of scientifi c knowledge represented by Duhem and Koyrй served as the point of departure for many subsequent investigations that provided modifi ed and compromise solutions to the problem of medieval contributions to the new European science.
In this paper we analyze the concept of "scientific revolution" in the work of the French philosopher, mathematician and economist Antoine Augustin Cournot (1801-1877). Cournot offers an original vision of the history and the historical process based on the concept of «chance» (hazard) which comes from his studies in the mathematical theory of probability. The history for Cournot is a combination of accidental and regular where the special role is played by great individuals. In science, it's great spirits who are able to produce a revolutionary restructuring of scientific knowledge by the discovery of new facts or by the invention of hypotheses that lead to improved organization and classification of the fundamental scientific principles.
The article considers the Views of L. N. Tolstoy not only as a representative, but also as a accomplisher of the Enlightenment. A comparison of his philosophy with the ideas of Spinoza and Diderot made it possible to clarify some aspects of the transition to the unique Tolstoy’s religious and philosophical doctrine. The comparison of General and specific features of the three philosophers was subjected to a special analysis. Special attention is paid to the way of thinking, the relation to science and the specifics of the worldview by Tolstoy and Diderot. An important aspect is researched the contradiction between the way of thinking and the way of life of the three philosophers.
Tolstoy's transition from rational perception of life to its religious and existential bases is shown. Tolstoy gradually moves away from the idea of a natural man to the idea of a man, who living the commandments of Christ. Starting from the educational worldview, Tolstoy ended by creation of religious and philosophical doctrine, which were relevant for the 20th century.
This important new book offers the first full-length interpretation of the thought of Martin Heidegger with respect to irony. In a radical reading of Heidegger's major works (from Being and Time through the ‘Rector's Address' and the ‘Letter on Humanism' to ‘The Origin of the Work of Art' and the Spiegel interview), Andrew Haas does not claim that Heidegger is simply being ironic. Rather he argues that Heidegger's writings make such an interpretation possible - perhaps even necessary.
Heidegger begins Being and Time with a quote from Plato, a thinker famous for his insistence upon Socratic irony. The Irony of Heidegger takes seriously the apparently curious decision to introduce the threat of irony even as philosophy begins in earnest to raise the question of the meaning of being. Through a detailed and thorough reading of Heidegger's major texts and the fundamental questions they raise, Haas reveals that one of the most important philosophers of the 20th century can be read with as much irony as earnestness. The Irony of Heidegger attempts to show that the essence of this irony lies in uncertainty, and that the entire project of onto-heno-chrono-phenomenology, therefore needs to be called into question.
The article is concerned with the notions of technology in essays of Ernst and Friedrich Georg Jünger. The special problem of the connection between technology and freedom is discussed in the broader context of the criticism of culture and technocracy discussion in the German intellectual history of the first half of the 20th century.