从阴谋论中解放出来

IF 0.1 4区 哲学 N/A PHILOSOPHY
M. Simons
{"title":"从阴谋论中解放出来","authors":"M. Simons","doi":"10.2143/TVF.79.3.3271932","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article argues that pseudoscience lacks an adequate philosophical analysis Using conspiracy theories as a case study, it is claimed that such an analysis need to go beyond a mere epistemological approach. In the first part, it is shown that the existing philosophical literature shares the assumption that conspiracy theories are primarily deficient scientific hypotheses. This claim is contested, because such an approach can only understand what conspiracy theories fail to be, but not what they are and why people tend to endorse them. To develop an alternative, the second part starts from recent sociology of science, applied to conspiracy theories, that claims that both true and false theories are in need of a symmetrical social explanation. However, this opens the path to relativism because it does not allow for a significant distinction between scientific and conspiracy theories. In the third section an alternative analysis of conspiracy theories is offered, which does not abandon this distinction. Moreover, it is claimed that the most important element of conspiracy theories is not their truth value but rather their symbolic structures of meaning. The aim of conspiracy theories, and perhaps of pseudoscience in general, is then not to know facts about the world, but rather to offer a meaningful framework within which to live.","PeriodicalId":53935,"journal":{"name":"TIJDSCHRIFT VOOR FILOSOFIE","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2017-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Naar een emancipatie van de complottheorie\",\"authors\":\"M. Simons\",\"doi\":\"10.2143/TVF.79.3.3271932\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article argues that pseudoscience lacks an adequate philosophical analysis Using conspiracy theories as a case study, it is claimed that such an analysis need to go beyond a mere epistemological approach. In the first part, it is shown that the existing philosophical literature shares the assumption that conspiracy theories are primarily deficient scientific hypotheses. This claim is contested, because such an approach can only understand what conspiracy theories fail to be, but not what they are and why people tend to endorse them. To develop an alternative, the second part starts from recent sociology of science, applied to conspiracy theories, that claims that both true and false theories are in need of a symmetrical social explanation. However, this opens the path to relativism because it does not allow for a significant distinction between scientific and conspiracy theories. In the third section an alternative analysis of conspiracy theories is offered, which does not abandon this distinction. Moreover, it is claimed that the most important element of conspiracy theories is not their truth value but rather their symbolic structures of meaning. The aim of conspiracy theories, and perhaps of pseudoscience in general, is then not to know facts about the world, but rather to offer a meaningful framework within which to live.\",\"PeriodicalId\":53935,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"TIJDSCHRIFT VOOR FILOSOFIE\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"TIJDSCHRIFT VOOR FILOSOFIE\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2143/TVF.79.3.3271932\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"N/A\",\"JCRName\":\"PHILOSOPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"TIJDSCHRIFT VOOR FILOSOFIE","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2143/TVF.79.3.3271932","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"N/A","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

本文认为伪科学缺乏足够的哲学分析,并以阴谋论为例,认为这种分析需要超越单纯的认识论方法。第一部分表明,现有的哲学文献都认为阴谋论主要是有缺陷的科学假设。这种说法是有争议的,因为这种方法只能理解阴谋论不能成为什么,而不能理解它们是什么,以及为什么人们倾向于支持它们。第二部分从最近应用于阴谋论的科学社会学开始,提出一种替代方案,即正确和错误的理论都需要一个对称的社会解释。然而,这开辟了通往相对主义的道路,因为它不允许在科学理论和阴谋论之间进行重大区分。在第三节中,提供了对阴谋论的另一种分析,这并没有放弃这种区分。此外,阴谋论最重要的元素不是其真值,而是其意义的象征结构。阴谋论的目的,也许是伪科学的目的,不是为了了解世界的事实,而是为了提供一个有意义的生活框架。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Naar een emancipatie van de complottheorie
This article argues that pseudoscience lacks an adequate philosophical analysis Using conspiracy theories as a case study, it is claimed that such an analysis need to go beyond a mere epistemological approach. In the first part, it is shown that the existing philosophical literature shares the assumption that conspiracy theories are primarily deficient scientific hypotheses. This claim is contested, because such an approach can only understand what conspiracy theories fail to be, but not what they are and why people tend to endorse them. To develop an alternative, the second part starts from recent sociology of science, applied to conspiracy theories, that claims that both true and false theories are in need of a symmetrical social explanation. However, this opens the path to relativism because it does not allow for a significant distinction between scientific and conspiracy theories. In the third section an alternative analysis of conspiracy theories is offered, which does not abandon this distinction. Moreover, it is claimed that the most important element of conspiracy theories is not their truth value but rather their symbolic structures of meaning. The aim of conspiracy theories, and perhaps of pseudoscience in general, is then not to know facts about the world, but rather to offer a meaningful framework within which to live.
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
CiteScore
0.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
1
期刊介绍: In het Tijdschrift voor Filosofie verschijnen thematische bijdragen, historische en kritische studies, literatuuroverzichten, boekbesprekingen en kronieken. Het staat open voor alle actuele stromingen in en voor discussies op de verscheidene domeinen van de filosofie. Het Tijdschrift voor Filosofie bevat bijdragen van filosofen uit verschillende landen. Het besteedt in het bijzonder aandacht aan het wijsgerige leven in Nederland en Vlaanderen en wil op wetenschappelijk niveau het wijsgerig gesprek in het Nederlands bevorderen. Elke bijdrage wordt ‘dubbel blind’ beoordeeld door tenminste twee deskundigen, afkomstig van verschillende universiteiten.
×
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