{"title":"Joseph Priestley a jeho přístup ke zkoumání lidské mysli","authors":"Eva Peterková","doi":"10.46938/tv.2018.386","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.46938/tv.2018.386","url":null,"abstract":"This article attempts to introduce Joseph Priestley’s approach to the research of the human mind. It is demonstrated in two consecutive steps how Priestley changes his view of matter and spirit, and how he moves to materialism. In the first step, he redefines the notion of matter and gives it new attributes – the forces of attraction and repulsion. In the second step, using these new attributes, he explains the ability of perception and thinking. In these steps, he also uses findings of the contemporary natural philosophy, especially the mechanics. For Priestley, man and his mind are part of nature. This means that the man and the human mind are a certain mechanism that works according to natural laws and can also be explained by these laws.","PeriodicalId":349992,"journal":{"name":"Teorie vědy / Theory of Science","volume":"17 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-11-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129026587","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Oko mysli: Agnes Arberová k otázce biologického hlediska","authors":"Martin Pudil","doi":"10.46938/tv.2018.397","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.46938/tv.2018.397","url":null,"abstract":"The study reflects the philosophical analysis of scientific research carried out by the botanist Agnes Arber in the 1950s. Her concept entails a valuable contribution to the question of the context of scientific discovery and the process of its rationalization in biological disciplines. I will try to show that her considerations are fundamentally phenomenological, and thus the comparison with the thoughts of Maurice Merleau-Ponty on the topic of corporeal nature of senses is useful. Such an interpretation suggests that Arber, similarly to Merleau-Ponty (though using different terminology), considers phenomena not as objects that can be examined separately, but as representing a phenomenal field in which phenomena arise in the con-text of past experience. According to her, the orientation in the subject of a study is a question of equilibrium, which a researcher actively seeks.","PeriodicalId":349992,"journal":{"name":"Teorie vědy / Theory of Science","volume":"180 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-11-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"133190989","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Werner Heisenberg, Niels Bohr a příběh kodaňské interpretace","authors":"Filip Grygar","doi":"10.46938/tv.2017.376","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.46938/tv.2017.376","url":null,"abstract":"The article focuses on the misleading story of the so-called Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics. The interpretation was allegedly created as unitary or consistent and shared by its founders in 1927 by virtue of the so-called Copenhagen spirit of quantum theory. The paper is based on the role which two leading figures, Niels Bohr and Werner Heisenberg, played in this story. The first part of the article introduces variations of what is considered to be Copenhagen interpretation. The second part reveals that while quantum mechanics had originated in the 1920s, the Copenhagen interpretation was mainly a problematic Heisenbergʼs product of the 1950s. One of his main motivations for the introduction of Copenhagen interpretation was to set up a defence against increasing criticism of the supporters of quantum theory. Since there was no unitary or consistent interpretation of quantum mechanics among members of the so-called Copenhagen school, the last part of the paper focuses on several differences primarily between Bohr and Heisenberg’s interpretation.","PeriodicalId":349992,"journal":{"name":"Teorie vědy / Theory of Science","volume":"45 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-04-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122755150","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Underdetermination and Models in Biology","authors":"P. Jedlicka","doi":"10.46938/tv.2017.360","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.46938/tv.2017.360","url":null,"abstract":"Since the early 20th century underdetermination has been one of the most contentious problems in the philosophy of science. In this article I relate the underdetermination problem to models in biology and defend two main lines of argument: First, the use of models in this discipline lends strong support to the underdetermination thesis. Second, models and theories in biology are not determined strictly by the logic of representation of the studied phenomena, but also by other constraints such as research traditions, backgrounds of the scientists, aims of the research and available technology. Convincing evidence for the existence of underdetermination in biology, where models abound, comes both from the fact that for a natural phenomenon we can create a number of candidate models but also from the fact that we do not have a universal rule that would adjudicate among them. This all makes a strong case for the general validity of underdetermination thesis.","PeriodicalId":349992,"journal":{"name":"Teorie vědy / Theory of Science","volume":"16 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-04-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128879798","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Huygens a Fontenelle o mimozemšťanech a lidech","authors":"Daniel Špelda","doi":"10.46938/tv.2017.385","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.46938/tv.2017.385","url":null,"abstract":"The article deals with selected aspects of two well-known publications on the multiplicity of worlds and extraterrestrial life that emerged at the end of the 17th century. These are Entretiens sur la pluralité des mondes (1686) by Bernard de Fontenelle and Cosmotheoros (1698) by Christiaan Huygens. In the first part, the article focuses primarily on how both authors understand the position of man in an inhabited and unbounded universe. Fontenelle and Huygens provide in their texts a convincing refutation of the often repeated notion that the idea of the infinite universe awakened terror and fears in early modern intellectuals. Actually, for them, the unbounded universe meant a celebration of reason that is able to emancipate itself from a geocentric superstition and anthropocentrism. At the same time, in the spirit of the early Enlightenment, it was also a celebration of the cosmic universality of reason. In its second part, the article deals with so-called cognitive passions: especially with fear, amazement and curiosity. The analysis of Huygens’ and Fontenelles’ works confirms and deepens some points of Lorraine Daston’s research. It turns out that at the end of the 17th century, fear and admiration were clearly understood as manifestations of ignorance and backwardness, although in the previous philosophical tradition they were associated with piety and the beginning of philosophy. Compared to it, traditionally condemned curiosity has become a legitimate, even desirable, characteristics of a true scientist.","PeriodicalId":349992,"journal":{"name":"Teorie vědy / Theory of Science","volume":"7 2","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-04-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"131672464","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Spor o vivisekce a české ženy na přelomu 19. a 20. století","authors":"Z. Jastrzembská","doi":"10.46938/tv.2017.371","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.46938/tv.2017.371","url":null,"abstract":"The paper presents a comparison of the character and development of the discussion on the use of animals for scientific purposes in England and the Czech Lands, with the emphasis on the connection between the anti-vivisection and women's movements. Against the background of the development of medical science, the first part describes the circumstances of the rise of the controversy and the path that led to the adoption of the first law regulating animal experiments. The second part presents the attitude of F. P. Cobbe, who was the most influential female figure in the debate. The third part maps the situation in the Czech Lands and suggests reasons as to why an organized anti-vivisection movement had not formed there. The author claims that the key role was played by the favorable perception of scientists due to their involvement in the process of National Revival. The last part presents the views on vivisection of two figures of Czech women's movement at the beginning of 20th century – P. Moudrá and E. Vozábová. The author shows that the arguments that depicted the experiment in medical science as an unnecessary and useless method of research could no longer be convincing at the time.","PeriodicalId":349992,"journal":{"name":"Teorie vědy / Theory of Science","volume":"7 11 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2018-04-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134007164","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Hieroglyfické písmo","authors":"T. Dvořák","doi":"10.46938/tv.2017.392","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.46938/tv.2017.392","url":null,"abstract":"The article discusses and critically reinterprets Carlo Ginzburg’s concept of the indexical paradigm in human sciences. It situates the method of reading insignificant details as indicators of an imperceptible reality into historical, cultural and technical context through examples of medical diagnosis and art connoisseurship. It traces links between the development of literacy, script, and graphology in the 19th century and the emergence of technical forms of inscription (self-registering instrument), which brought new methods of interpretation and analysis into many fields and challenged traditional boundaries between natural, social, and human sciences.","PeriodicalId":349992,"journal":{"name":"Teorie vědy / Theory of Science","volume":"18 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2017-12-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134259382","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Anomálie a metodologie vědy","authors":"Peter Sýkora","doi":"10.46938/tv.2017.396","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.46938/tv.2017.396","url":null,"abstract":"Book review:Vladimír Havlík. Anomálie, ad hoc hypotézy a temné stránky kosmologie. Plzeň: Západočeská univerzita v Plzni, 2015, 165 pages.","PeriodicalId":349992,"journal":{"name":"Teorie vědy / Theory of Science","volume":"6 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2017-12-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130346191","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Věda jako morální volba","authors":"Libor Benda","doi":"10.46938/tv.2017.370","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.46938/tv.2017.370","url":null,"abstract":"Book review:Harry Collins Robert Evans, Why Democracies Need Science. Cambridge: Polity Press 2017, viii + 194 pp.","PeriodicalId":349992,"journal":{"name":"Teorie vědy / Theory of Science","volume":"63 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2017-12-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125297053","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"On the Nature of Models: The Unfinished Debate","authors":"P. Jedlicka","doi":"10.46938/tv.2017.374","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.46938/tv.2017.374","url":null,"abstract":"Book review:Ippoliti, Emiliano, Sterpetti, Fabio, Nickles Thomas (editors): Models and Inferences in Science (Switzerland: Springer International Publishing, 2016, 256 p.)","PeriodicalId":349992,"journal":{"name":"Teorie vědy / Theory of Science","volume":"74 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2017-12-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132797144","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：