网范文：“What is a worldview ” 本文的第一部分提出了一种精确的定义，英语论文，什么是世界观。第二部分说明如何构建集成的科学世界观，提出了三种一般科学措施。在这篇哲学范文中，我们谈一下科学世界观。术语的世界观有着悠久的历史。使用范畴不仅在哲学,也在神学、人类学、或教育领域。不幸的是这个词经常使用没有任何精确的定义。更精确的来讨论，世界观是什么?我们如何定义?甚至在哲学内部,提供了许多不同的定义(例如由康德、黑格尔、海德格尔等等)。
对不同世界观的定义，英语论文范文，进行一个系统的历史比较。相反,我们提出一个明确的和富有成果的定义,我们将详细介绍。我们的略论这样一个事实:许多深刻古老的哲学问题现在通过科学手段可以解决。下面的范文将进行详述。
Abstract
The first part of this proposes a precise definition of what a worldview is, and why there is a necessity to have one. The second part suggests how to construct integrated scientific worldviews. For this attempts, three general scientific approaches are proposed: the general systems theory as the endeavor for a universal language for science, a general problem-solving approach and the idea of evolution, broadly construed. We close with some remarks about limitations of scientific worldview.
Introduction
The term worldview (Weltanschauung in German) has a long and fascinating history going back to Kant2 . It has been and is used not only in philosophy, but also among others in theology, anthropology, or in education. David K. Naugle wrote a history of this concept and the above quotation shows its central importance. The term is unfortunately often used without any precise definition behind it. What is more precisely a worldview? How can we define it? Even inside philosophy, many different definitions have been provided (e.g. by Kant, Hegel, Kierkegaard, Dilthey, Husserl, Jaspers, Heidegger, etc.). Conducting a systematic historical comparison of the different worldview definitions is outside the scope of this 3 . Instead, we restrict our analysis to a clear and fruitful definition proposed by Leo Apostel and Jan van der Veken that we will detail in our first section.
The second part of our analysis starts from the fact that many of our profound age-old philosophical questions can nowadays be tackled by scientific means. However, in trying to build a comprehensive worldview, a problem arises, namely that different scientific disciplines use different languages. This gap is especially important when we consider the difference between exact and human sciences. What are the most suitable features of an integrative scientific worldview? How could these features help to fill this gap? Three general scientific approaches are proposed for this endeavour: systems theory as a universal language for science, a problem-solving approach and the general idea of evolution, broadly construed. We close with some remarks about the limitations of a purely scientific worldview.
The worldview agenda
Leo Apostel Great philosophers are so because of their ambition to build systems of thought answering a maximum of our deepest philosophical questions. One of the last great attempts was made by Rudolf Carnap. Nowadays, Carnap is almost always quoted in order to be bitterly criticised -and on very strong grounds. However, one of his students, Leo Apostel (1925-1995) kept the same ambition, the same grandeur, without the naive and reductionistic presuppositions of the Vienna Circle. This led him among others to create an interdisciplinary research group, The Worldviews group, and to write a short book together with Jan Van der Veken4 , which can be compared with the manifesto of the Wiener Kreis5 . The difference between the two is that the latter had a recognition it did not deserve, and the former deserves a recognition that it did not have.
What is a worldview?
The two concepts “philosophy” and “worldview” are closely related. Talking about "a philosophy" in its broadest sense refers in fact to a worldview. It is the case for example when we speak about the philosophy of the Inuit or the Maya. Wolters6 summarized the relationships between worldview and philosophy. With the definition which will follow, our position tends towards what he calls "worldview crowns philosophy", that is, constructing a worldview is the highest manifestation of philosophy. The term “worldview” is often used to emphasize a personal and historical point of view. In this sense, the term can have a negative connotation for the philosopher, because philosophy generally claims universal validity, as it has a clear association with rational thought. It is however possible to define the class of philosophical worldviews, as rooted in rationality and thus also aiming at a kind of universal validity. The next subsection will expose six questions which constitute our precise definition of what a worldview is. Those general philosophical questions are of paramount importance, constituting an enduring philosophical agenda7 . The agenda defines the range of problems and issues that are addressed by a philosophy. With Rescher8 , we can distinguish between the “procedural agenda”, which is what we call here the worldview questions; and the “substantive agenda”, which consists of the proposed answers to the questions, and are the worldview components. The components articulated together form a worldview, that we define as a coherent collection of concepts allowing us “to construct a global image of the world, and in this way to understand as many elements of our experience as possible."9
Back to the fundamental questions In this section we present the six worldview questions. These questions corresponds to the “big”, “eternal”, or “age-old” philosophical questions. . The choice of the questions is motivated in more details in the book by Apostel and Van der Veken10; also reformulated by Heylighen11. We build on those two references for what follows. The traditional philosophical disciplines can be seen as answering these questions, presented in the table 1 below.
Conclusion
We exposed Apostel's definition of a worldview and gave examples of worldviews, arguing that there is an evolutionary, psychological and sociological necessity to have one. We then proposed three fundamental approaches needed when trying to build an integrated scientific worldview. First, general systems theory provides concepts that are general enough so that they constitute an important step towards a universal language for science. Second, a problem-solving perspective on science allows us to naturally bridge the gaps between sciences, focusing on the problem to solve, using as many scientific resources needed to tackle the challenge at stake. Third, general evolutionary theory (not only biological evolution) allow us to understand how systems change through time. We closed with some remarks about the limitations of purely scientific worldviews, suggesting that such a scientific worldview should also take into account the related philosophical dimensions of any worldview.()
网站原创范文除特殊说明外一切图文作品权归所有；未经官方授权谢绝任何用途转载或刊发于媒体。如发生侵犯作品权现象，保留一切法学追诉权。()
更多范文欢迎访问我们主页 当然有需求可以和我们 联系交流。-X()
|
