Common sense, scientific images, and the aesthetic mode of knowing.

IF 1 3区 哲学 Q1 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE
Shani Inbar, Eva Jablonka, Simona Ginsburg, Anna Zeligowski
{"title":"Common sense, scientific images, and the aesthetic mode of knowing.","authors":"Shani Inbar, Eva Jablonka, Simona Ginsburg, Anna Zeligowski","doi":"10.1007/s40656-025-00697-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In modern English, common sense refers to an intuitive capacity to grasp self-evident truths and make judgments that require no special training or expertise. Although often treated as universal and ahistorical, its standing as an epistemic authority, especially within the sciences, has been contested, revised, and reconfigured over the past two centuries. Yet scientists' assumptions about the reliability of common sense typically remain implicit, embedded in a normative background that is rarely examined but quietly guides scientific thought. This paper examines how different attitudes toward common sense are reflected in the aesthetic choices and visual references scientists use. Through three case studies-Ernst Haeckel, Conrad Waddington, and Ginsburg & Jablonka-we demonstrate how their respective views, firmly rooted in their historical context, are made accessible through their aesthetic choices. Examining these choices reveals that scientific images, particularly those with artistic qualities, do more than depict scientific knowledge; they reflect underlying normative commitments, shaping what is seen as intelligible and scientifically meaningful. They are sites where scientific sensibilities and epistemic commitments become visible and available for critique. Drawing on Kant's notion of sensus communis, we suggest that aesthetic judgments, particularly of scientific representations, provide a reflective standpoint from which such implicit commitments can be evaluated.</p>","PeriodicalId":56308,"journal":{"name":"History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences","volume":"47 4","pages":"47"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12511128/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40656-025-00697-z","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In modern English, common sense refers to an intuitive capacity to grasp self-evident truths and make judgments that require no special training or expertise. Although often treated as universal and ahistorical, its standing as an epistemic authority, especially within the sciences, has been contested, revised, and reconfigured over the past two centuries. Yet scientists' assumptions about the reliability of common sense typically remain implicit, embedded in a normative background that is rarely examined but quietly guides scientific thought. This paper examines how different attitudes toward common sense are reflected in the aesthetic choices and visual references scientists use. Through three case studies-Ernst Haeckel, Conrad Waddington, and Ginsburg & Jablonka-we demonstrate how their respective views, firmly rooted in their historical context, are made accessible through their aesthetic choices. Examining these choices reveals that scientific images, particularly those with artistic qualities, do more than depict scientific knowledge; they reflect underlying normative commitments, shaping what is seen as intelligible and scientifically meaningful. They are sites where scientific sensibilities and epistemic commitments become visible and available for critique. Drawing on Kant's notion of sensus communis, we suggest that aesthetic judgments, particularly of scientific representations, provide a reflective standpoint from which such implicit commitments can be evaluated.

常识,科学形象,以及认识的审美模式。
在现代英语中,common sense指的是一种不需要特殊训练或专业知识就能掌握不言而喻的真理并做出判断的直觉能力。虽然经常被视为普遍的和非历史的,但它作为认识权威的地位,特别是在科学领域,在过去的两个世纪里受到了质疑,修订和重新配置。然而,科学家对常识可靠性的假设通常仍然是隐含的,嵌入在一个很少被检验的规范背景中,但却悄悄地指导着科学思想。本文探讨了对常识的不同态度如何反映在科学家使用的美学选择和视觉参考中。通过三个案例研究——ernst Haeckel, Conrad Waddington和Ginsburg & jablonka,我们展示了他们各自的观点是如何根植于他们的历史背景中,通过他们的审美选择来实现的。对这些选择的研究表明,科学图像,特别是那些具有艺术品质的图像,不仅仅是描绘科学知识;它们反映了潜在的规范性承诺,塑造了被视为可理解和科学意义的东西。它们是科学敏感性和认识论承诺变得可见和可用于批判的场所。根据康德的“共感”概念,我们认为美学判断,特别是科学表征的审美判断,提供了一个反思的立场,可以从中评估这种隐含的承诺。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences
History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences 综合性期刊-科学史与科学哲学
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
5.00%
发文量
58
期刊介绍: History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences is an interdisciplinary journal committed to providing an integrative approach to understanding the life sciences. It welcomes submissions from historians, philosophers, biologists, physicians, ethicists and scholars in the social studies of science. Contributors are expected to offer broad and interdisciplinary perspectives on the development of biology, biomedicine and related fields, especially as these perspectives illuminate the foundations, development, and/or implications of scientific practices and related developments. Submissions which are collaborative and feature different disciplinary approaches are especially encouraged, as are submissions written by senior and junior scholars (including graduate students).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信