Archivi categoria: Filosofia della scienza

“Émilie du Châtelet, une femme de sciences et des lettres à Créteil”: il sito della mostra dedicata a Émilie du Châtelet

mostra Châtelet

Se siete interessati a Émilie du Châtelet, colta pensatrice, traduttrice dei Principes di Newton e compagna di Voltaire, vi segnaliamo il sito dell’esposizione a lei dedicata nel 2006 per il trecentenario della nascita: Émilie du Châtelet, une femme de sciences et des lettres à Créteil.

Il sito è ricco di risorse interessanti:

1 Commento

Archiviato in Biblioteche digitali, Biografie, Cataloghi, eBook di Filosofia, Filosofia della scienza, Filosofia moderna, Lettere, Mostre on-line, Uncategorized

eBook di filosofia: I. Lakatos, Modern Physics, Modern Society

lakatos-cropped-Wx786-669x272

Imre Lakatos, Modern Physics, Modern Society

“Imre Lakatos’s philosophy of science is rooted in a number of different fields, and not all of them are purely scientific. During his years of education, he was influenced by mathematics and natural sciences as well as by philosophy, but the role of political ideologies cannot be denied. His basic philosophical ideas – such as the rationality of science, the continual growth of knowledge, the social determinism of scientific activities, and the indispensable role of historical attitude in the philosophy of science – are definitely in accordance with his early devotion to Marxism (and Lukacs’s philosophy) both in theory and in practice.

One can easily find clear evidences that Lakatos saw basic connections between the theoretical sciences he studied and the practical principles he followed in politics. This is clearly demonstrated by the early papers he published in different journals, and it must have played an important role in the doctoral dissertation he wrote in 1947. Unfortunately, no copy of this dissertation can be found now. There are several assumptions as to when and why the paper disappeared, but most probably Lakatos himself might have “stolen” it some time before leaving Hungary in 1956. Later he hinted several times that he was rather unsatisfied with it, regarded it as “immature”, and he also said that he would not have minded if nobody had ever seen it. After some failures to find it, we have good reasons to believe that the dissertation is lost for ever.

Fortunately, we are not left without traces of the contents of this work, because it seems that important parts of it were published while it was being written. Sándor Karácsony, one of the most influential of Lakatos’s teachers in the university, the opponent of the dissertation, evaluated it in July 8, 1947 with the following words:

“I got interested in the foregoing scientific activities of this young man, and not least because I read most of them at the moment they were published. Now I see all of Imre Lakatos’s work in unity, and I deem that it comes up to the standard. His dissertation is not a sudden idea, it was matured by two previous publications, both in very serious journals. The first was published in Athenaeum under the title A fizikai idealizmus bírálatai, and the second came out in a thick volume written to teachers: Továbbképzés és demokráciaii, entitled Modern fizika, modern társadalomiii.”

Here we can skip a list of Lakatos’s early publications cited by Karácsony in the evaluation. We continue the quotation, however, with mentioning another important paper, since its topic – education – was extremely important for Lakatos at this time, and formed the subject of a lot of his investigations. Karácsony writes:

“The journal Embernevelésiv also published a paper by Lakatos, which had the title: Demokratikus nevelés és természettudományos világnézetv. Its most essential statement is: democratic education teaches humbleness towards the facts, it teaches the desire to face reality instead of mere views. The original democracy of natural sciences is to be emphasised: their facts and theories can be controlled by anyone, and this control drives them forward.

The foregoing scientific works of Imre Lakatos are based on dialectic Marxism, but in its modern and not orthodox form. And it is only a base, since he himself has original and particular things to say, and more now than earlier. His originality is increasing. The philosophy behind all of his opinions is consistent and systematic.”

Now, if we compare the two papers mentioned by Sándor Karácsony as the preliminaries of the dissertation, we come to see that the essential body of the earlier one (The Criticism of the Physical Idealism) is almost literally identical to a great part of the longer paper (Modern Physics, Modern Society). The small differences are either stylistic or explanatory, since the journal Further Education and Democracy, an ideological collection of writings for supporting teachers (published by the Ministry of Religion and Education), served more popular purposes than the rather scientific Athenaeum, the journal of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences and the Hungarian Philosophical Society. Naturally, it is very likely that this text contains most of young Lakatos’s essential thoughts and ideas concerning the position, the development and the function of science, and it is reasonable to suppose that it formed an important part of the lost dissertation entitled A természettudományos fogalomalkotás szociológiájárólvi.

The Criticism of the Physical Idealism is a critical essay discussing Susan Stebbing’s book Philosophy and the Physicists (London, Pelican, 1943). Lakatos, however, criticises not only Stebbing’s analyses of Eddington’s and Jeans’ idealism, but he also adds his own criticism of the two scientists’ world views that he considers as typical examples of the “bourgeois” science. Instead of focusing on the immanent development of science, he decides to look for explanations outside of science. He emphasises the indispensable role of sociological and economic influences on scientific concept building, and he concludes that the world view of a given scientific age or community is nothing more than a historical category. The whole argumentation appears again in Modern Physics, Modern Society, supplemented by some further ideas and more loose associations: the context becomes broader and the investigations more fundamental. Here we are given a deeper (Marxist and Lukacsian contra Hegelian) analysis of the “dialectical structure” of the modern scientific view determined by social relations and motions. And if we imagine that we go further in this direction, then we must be very close to the text of the lost dissertation.”

 

Lascia un commento

Archiviato in eBook di Filosofia, Filosofia della scienza

Transversal. International Journal for the Historiography of Science

logo-transversal

Transversal: International Journal for the Historiography of Science è la giovane rivista online semestrale pubblicata dal “Graduate Program” in “Science and Culture in History” dell’Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais.

La rivista pubblica saggi e articoli di storiografia della scienza vista da diverse prospettive, compresa quella filosofica.

“Although historiography of science is a sub-discipline of History, we construe this subject broadly to include analysis of the historiography of science produced by history of science, philosophy of science and related disciplines. By focusing its analysis on the different historical, social and epistemological implications of science, historiography of science is a transversal knowledge with respect to the production of science, hence the name of this journal.”

Lascia un commento

Archiviato in Filosofia della scienza, Periodici

Ptolemaeus Arabus et Latinus (PAL): il sito web con le versioni in lingua araba e latina delle opere di Tolomeo

tolomeo

Ptolemaeus Arabus et Latinus (PAL) è il progetto  della Bayerische Akademie der Wissenschaften, al momento in versione beta, che si propone l’edizione e lo studio delle versioni in lingua araba e latina, pubblicate fino al 1700, del Corpus Ptolemaicum .

“Corpus Ptolemaicum includes three categories of texts:

  1. Ptolemy’s authentic works, comprising the Almagest, the Tetrabiblos and the minor works Analemma, Phases of the Fixed Stars, Planetary Hypotheses and Planisphaerium.
  2. Pseudepigrapha (works falsely attributed to Ptolemy), i.e. mainly the Centiloquium, but also other astronomical and astrological works, about 30 of which are known in Arabic and Latin.
  3. Commentaries on the texts under A and B above.”

 Al momento il sito contiente:

  • Works: 120 voci dedicate alle traduzioni latine di Tolomeo
  • Manuscripts: più di 250 voci descrittive sui manoscritti latini che riportano le opere di Tolomeo
  • Glossary: quasi 2000 termini tecnici in lingua greca e araba tratti da testi selezionati (Almagest I-II, Planetary Hypotheses, Planispherium, Tetrabiblos).

Sono presenti due trascrizioni:

  • Almagest, nella versione latina di Gerardi da Cremona
  • Almagestum parvum

Le riproduzioni digitali saranno progressivamente implementate fino alla fine dell’anno.

Lascia un commento

Archiviato in Biblioteche digitali, Dizionari, Filosofia della scienza, Manoscritti, Scienza

eBook di filosofia: C. Motta, L’evoluzione delle capacità mentali e del senso morale nell’uomo e negli altri animali

darwin

Costanza Motta, L’evoluzione delle capacità mentali e del senso morale nell’uomo e negli altri animali. Un percorso di continuità tra David Hume e Charles Darwin 

Tesi di laurea triennale. Relatore: prof. Giulio Giorello

Lascia un commento

Archiviato in eBook di Filosofia, Etica, Filosofia della scienza, Tesi

De revolutionibus: il sito con le immagini della copia autografa del De revolutionibus di Copernico

copernico

De revolutionibus  è il sito che propone le immagini e il testo della copia autografa del De revolutionibus di Copernico.

It had remained in Copernicus’ hands until his death (24 May 1543). His papers and books passed to his closest friend, Tiedemann Giese (1480-1550), a bishop in Chelmno at that time. He bequeathed his library to Warmia Chapter. However, the autograph went to the collection of George Joachim Rheticus (1514-1574), astronomer, Copernicus’ pupil. Rheticus was occupied with publishing the work of his master, but the basis for printing was not the autograph but its copy. It was also Rheticus who played the main role in spreading the thought and work of Copernicus. The autograph together with its new owner stayed for some time in Leipzig and in Cracow (about 1554 to 1574). Then it went to Kosice (Kaschau). There, after Rheticus’ death, the new owner became his pupil and colleague, Valentine Otho (about 1545 – about 1603), who took it with him to Heidelberg. After Otho’s death the autograph was bought by a professor from Heidelberg, Jakub Christmann (1554-1613). From professor’s widow the manuscript was purchased on 17 January 1614 by the famous scholar and teacher from Moravia, Jan Amos Komensky (1592-1670). May be the autograph together with Komensky came again to Poland.

It is not known what happened to it next. On 5 October 1667 the holdings of Otto von Nostitz (1608-1664) library, located in Jawor Slaski at that time were registered; the Copernicus’ autograph is entered in this inventory. Otto left his signature on the flyleaf. The Nostitz library was then moved to Prague. The autograph had stayed in the afore-said library until the end of the Second World War being used by the scholars for the research studies and publications.

In 1945 the collection of Nostitz library in Prague was nationalized by the government of the contemporary Republic of Czechoslovakia and so the Copernicus’ manuscript became part of the collection of the National Museum Library in Prague.

On 7 July 1956 the government of Czechoslovakia passed the priceless historical monument, on exchange, to the Polish nation and on 25 September 1956 it was given to Jagiellonian University in Cracow. Finally, the autograph was taken care of by the university in which Nicholas Copernicus was educated and from which he received scientific foundation for his memorable work.

Lascia un commento

Archiviato in Biblioteche digitali, Filosofia della scienza

Risorse bibligrafiche su David Bohm

220px-david_bohm

Presso la Birkbeck Library dell’Università di Londra è conservato l’archivio di David Bohm, docente di Fisica teorica presso lo stesso ateneo dal 1961 al 1987.

Nella pagina web a lui dedicata potete trovare:

 

1 Commento

Archiviato in Archivi, Bibliografie, Filosofia contemporanea, Filosofia della scienza

eBook di filosofia: C. R. Palmerino J. M. M. H Thijssen, The Reception of the Galilean Science of Motion in Seventeenth-Century Europe

(c) Wellcome Library; Supplied by The Public Catalogue Foundation

Carla Rita Palmerino J. M. M. H Thijssen, The Reception of the Galilean Science of Motion in Seventeenth-Century Europe

1 Commento

Archiviato in eBook di Filosofia, Filosofia della scienza

Argumentos de Razón Técnica: la rivista online sui rapporti scienza-società

argumentos

Argumentos de Razón Técnica. Revista española de ciencia, tecnología y sociedad, y filosofía de la tecnología  è la rivista online bilingue anglo-spagnola interessata alla realazioni e all’impatto delle conoscenze scientifiche sulla società.

“Su objetivo central es integrar perspectivas de investigación tanto sobre problemas epistemológicos, históricos y éticos, como acerca de las dimensiones sociopolíticas, socioeconómicas y socioculturales de la investigación científica y tecnológica. Se pretende por tanto promover el estudio y la reflexión sobre uno de los ejes fundamentales de la cultura y sociedad contemporáneas mediante la convergencia de la “cultura de las humanidades” con la “cultura científica y tecnológica”. Quiere fomentar de ese modo la conjunción de puntos de vista, tanto de científicos y tecnólogos, interesados en un mejor entendimiento de las implicaciones sociales de su trabajo, como de filósofos, historiadores y sociólogos de la Ciencia y de la Tecnología; y asimismo de economistas, juristas, científicos sociales y profesionales que traten algunos de los múltiples aspectos de las relaciones entre Ciencia, Tecnología y Sociedad.”

Lascia un commento

Archiviato in Filosofia della scienza, Periodici

Catalogo della Corrispondenza di Marin Mersenne

mersenne

All’interno dell’interessante portale Early Modern Letters Online (EMTO), dedicato agli epistolari di età moderna, trovate il Catalogo della Corrispondenza di Marin Mersenne, matematico, filosofo e scienzato in contatto con i più noti filosofi, eruditi e scienziati del suo tempo: N.-C. Fabri de Peiresc, R. Descartes, P. Gassendi, P. Fermat, Pascal padre e figlio, Th. Hobbes, Ch. Huygens, E. Torricelli.

Nel catalogo sono presenti le descrizioni delle lettere, delle biblioteche che conservano il manoscritto e della presenza della versione stampata.

“Mersenne was one of the most active ‘intelligencers’ and intellectual impresarios of the seventeenth century. He is perhaps best known as the friend, correspondent, and agent of Descartes, but his network of personal and intellectual contacts ranged far and wide, including not only philosophers but also mathematicians, musical theorists, medical men, antiquarians, oriental scholars, and theologians — Dutch, English and Italian as well as French, and Protestant as well as Catholic. He acted as midwife to many publications, and wrote significant works of his own on theology, music, and natural philosophy.

Of fairly humble origins (his father was an overseer of farm workers), Mersenne was a pupil at the Jesuit college of La Flèche from 1604 to 1609. After two years studying theology at the Sorbonne he entered the Minim order of friars in 1611. From 1619 until the end of his life (with occasional interruptions) he lived in the Minim convent near the Place royale in Paris. His early publications were, in part or in whole, polemical works, directed against hermeticists and occultists, deists, libertines, and sceptics; his attack on the hermeticist Robert Fludd brought him to the attention of Pierre Gassendi, who became a close friend. During the early 1620s he also became acquainted with Nicolas-Claude Fabri de Peiresc, who introduced him to a wider circle of Parisian intellectuals and became a mentor, and a model, for Mersenne’s own development as an intelligencer. In 1626 Mersenne published the first of his scientific compilations, Synopsis mathematica, a collection of ancient and recent mathematical texts. By this stage he had begun holding weekly scientific discussions in his convent, and developing correspondence with learned men throughout Europe. His close friendship with Descartes apparently dates from the latter’s long stays in Paris in the 1620s; when Descartes moved to the Netherlands in 1628 he entrusted Mersenne with the task of managing all his French correspondence.

During the early 1630s Mersenne was attracted to, and became an active proselytiser for, the ‘new’ mechanistic philosophy. This may have been stimulated by a visit to Isaac Beeckman in the Netherlands in 1630; it was strengthened by prolonged study of the works of Galileo, whose treatise on mechanics Mersenne translated and published in 1634. In the mid-1630s he was also working intensively on musical matters, gathering and publishing a mass of material on almost every aspect of music, from its physics to its history. Mersenne went to great trouble to arrange the publication of Descartes’s Meditationes in 1641, commissioning sets of ‘objections’ from various writers, to which Descartes wrote replies. Two of the objectors were major philosophers deeply opposed to Cartesian principles: Gassendi and Thomas Hobbes (who had first met Mersenne in the mid-1630s, and became a close friend after his move to Paris in late 1640). It was characteristic of Mersenne that he could maintain the most friendly relations with people who were intellectually at daggers drawn; another of his most valued acquaintances was the mathematician Gilles Personne de Roberval, a notoriously outspoken anti-Cartesian.

Mersenne published two important compilations of scientific works in 1644, and a third in 1647; they included treatises by Hobbes and Roberval, and texts by Torricelli. He travelled to Italy in 1644–5, and to the south of France in 1646–7. But after his return to Paris he fell ill, and on 1 September 1648 he died. He left several unpublished manuscripts (an optical treatise was printed in 1651), a mass of correspondence, and grieving friends throughout the learned world. Mersenne was not a major original thinker, but the stimulus he gave to other writers in many fields — by posing problems, transmitting objections, supplying information, brokering contacts, prompting publication or indeed organizing it himself — was absolutely invaluable”.

 

Lascia un commento

Archiviato in Cataloghi, Filosofia della scienza, Lettere