广义相对论与因果关系、形而上学推理与E. J. Lowe的本体论

N. Golovko
{"title":"广义相对论与因果关系、形而上学推理与E. J. Lowe的本体论","authors":"N. Golovko","doi":"10.25205/2541-7517-2021-19-3-5-32","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The paper aims to show the importance of reasoning “from metaphysics” in the course of a consistent interpretation of the “against neoscholasticism” thesis (J. Ladyman). The idea that “the subject of metaphysics is metaphysical possibilities, and science determines which of them are actually achieved” (E. J. Lowe, J. Katz, etc.) reinforces the role of reasoning “from metaphysics” within the field of metaphysics of science. The general theory of relativity violates the common prevailing intuition that “causality is the subject of local physical interaction” (J. Bigelow). Interpretation of causality in terms of “forces” and “coming into” within the framework of E. J. Lowe's ontology makes it possible to talk about causality in terms of “finding” and “going out” of existence of the corresponding modes of objects connected by a formal “causal relationship”. The transition to E. J. Lowe's ontology helps not only to overcome the intuition of the locality of causality, but also reveals in its own way, for example, such seemingly simple common intuitions as the dependence of the truth of propositions on time or the understanding of time as a dimension. All this once again brings us back to the understanding of the importance of the fact that a scientist, constructing or interpreting a scientific theory, as a rule, uses non-trivial philosophical assumptions that should be the subject of its own philosophical analysis. ","PeriodicalId":240316,"journal":{"name":"Siberian Journal of Philosophy","volume":"5 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"General Relativity and Causality, Reasoning from Metaphysics, and E. J. Lowe’s Ontology\",\"authors\":\"N. Golovko\",\"doi\":\"10.25205/2541-7517-2021-19-3-5-32\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The paper aims to show the importance of reasoning “from metaphysics” in the course of a consistent interpretation of the “against neoscholasticism” thesis (J. Ladyman). The idea that “the subject of metaphysics is metaphysical possibilities, and science determines which of them are actually achieved” (E. J. Lowe, J. Katz, etc.) reinforces the role of reasoning “from metaphysics” within the field of metaphysics of science. The general theory of relativity violates the common prevailing intuition that “causality is the subject of local physical interaction” (J. Bigelow). Interpretation of causality in terms of “forces” and “coming into” within the framework of E. J. Lowe's ontology makes it possible to talk about causality in terms of “finding” and “going out” of existence of the corresponding modes of objects connected by a formal “causal relationship”. The transition to E. J. Lowe's ontology helps not only to overcome the intuition of the locality of causality, but also reveals in its own way, for example, such seemingly simple common intuitions as the dependence of the truth of propositions on time or the understanding of time as a dimension. All this once again brings us back to the understanding of the importance of the fact that a scientist, constructing or interpreting a scientific theory, as a rule, uses non-trivial philosophical assumptions that should be the subject of its own philosophical analysis. \",\"PeriodicalId\":240316,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Siberian Journal of Philosophy\",\"volume\":\"5 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Siberian Journal of Philosophy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.25205/2541-7517-2021-19-3-5-32\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Siberian Journal of Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.25205/2541-7517-2021-19-3-5-32","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

本文旨在说明在对“反对新经院哲学”的论点(J. Ladyman)进行一致解释的过程中,“从形而上学出发”的推理的重要性。“形而上学的主题是形而上学的可能性,而科学决定了其中哪些是实际实现的”(E. J. Lowe, J. Katz等)的观点强化了“来自形而上学”的推理在科学形而上学领域中的作用。广义相对论违背了普遍流行的直觉,即“因果关系是局部物理相互作用的主题”(J.毕格罗)。在E. J. Lowe的本体论框架内,用“力”和“进入”来解释因果关系,使得用“发现”和“走出”由形式“因果关系”连接的对象的相应模式的存在来谈论因果关系成为可能。向E. J. Lowe的本体论的过渡不仅有助于克服因果关系的局部性直觉,而且还以自己的方式揭示了一些看似简单的普通直觉,例如命题的真理依赖于时间或将时间理解为一个维度。所有这一切再一次把我们带回到对这样一个事实的重要性的理解:一个科学家,在构建或解释一个科学理论时,通常会使用非平凡的哲学假设,这些假设应该是他自己哲学分析的主题。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
General Relativity and Causality, Reasoning from Metaphysics, and E. J. Lowe’s Ontology
The paper aims to show the importance of reasoning “from metaphysics” in the course of a consistent interpretation of the “against neoscholasticism” thesis (J. Ladyman). The idea that “the subject of metaphysics is metaphysical possibilities, and science determines which of them are actually achieved” (E. J. Lowe, J. Katz, etc.) reinforces the role of reasoning “from metaphysics” within the field of metaphysics of science. The general theory of relativity violates the common prevailing intuition that “causality is the subject of local physical interaction” (J. Bigelow). Interpretation of causality in terms of “forces” and “coming into” within the framework of E. J. Lowe's ontology makes it possible to talk about causality in terms of “finding” and “going out” of existence of the corresponding modes of objects connected by a formal “causal relationship”. The transition to E. J. Lowe's ontology helps not only to overcome the intuition of the locality of causality, but also reveals in its own way, for example, such seemingly simple common intuitions as the dependence of the truth of propositions on time or the understanding of time as a dimension. All this once again brings us back to the understanding of the importance of the fact that a scientist, constructing or interpreting a scientific theory, as a rule, uses non-trivial philosophical assumptions that should be the subject of its own philosophical analysis. 
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信