亚里士多德论科学探究中的辩证法与定义

IF 0.1 0 HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Fabián Mié
{"title":"亚里士多德论科学探究中的辩证法与定义","authors":"Fabián Mié","doi":"10.14195/1984-249x_32_16","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"By framing Aristotle’s dialectic in the broader context of scientific inquiry and demonstration, this paper is aimed at showing of what use the “reputable opinions” can be for grasping the principles of sciences, as declared in Topics I.2. It argues that such a use cannot imply ‒ at any stage of inquiry ‒ a replacement of the logic and intrinsic goals of demonstration by those proper to dialectic. However, it also defends a substantive (but still modest) contribution of dialectic ‒ beyond its well-attested methodological role in discarding contradictory opinions and its (possible though not germane to the context of Topics I.2) application to proving the principle of non-contradiction by means of refutation. This contribution consists in providing the preliminary accounts of facts in order to have scientific inquiry started, as required in Posterior Analytics II.8. To better appreciate how the proposed location of dialectic in a pre-demonstrative stage of inquiry is operational, the paper finally examines Physics IV.1-5.","PeriodicalId":41249,"journal":{"name":"Archai-Revista de Estudos Sobre as Origens do Pensamento Ocidental","volume":"6 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Aristotle on dialectic and definition in scientific inquiry\",\"authors\":\"Fabián Mié\",\"doi\":\"10.14195/1984-249x_32_16\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"By framing Aristotle’s dialectic in the broader context of scientific inquiry and demonstration, this paper is aimed at showing of what use the “reputable opinions” can be for grasping the principles of sciences, as declared in Topics I.2. It argues that such a use cannot imply ‒ at any stage of inquiry ‒ a replacement of the logic and intrinsic goals of demonstration by those proper to dialectic. However, it also defends a substantive (but still modest) contribution of dialectic ‒ beyond its well-attested methodological role in discarding contradictory opinions and its (possible though not germane to the context of Topics I.2) application to proving the principle of non-contradiction by means of refutation. This contribution consists in providing the preliminary accounts of facts in order to have scientific inquiry started, as required in Posterior Analytics II.8. To better appreciate how the proposed location of dialectic in a pre-demonstrative stage of inquiry is operational, the paper finally examines Physics IV.1-5.\",\"PeriodicalId\":41249,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Archai-Revista de Estudos Sobre as Origens do Pensamento Ocidental\",\"volume\":\"6 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Archai-Revista de Estudos Sobre as Origens do Pensamento Ocidental\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.14195/1984-249x_32_16\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archai-Revista de Estudos Sobre as Origens do Pensamento Ocidental","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14195/1984-249x_32_16","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"HUMANITIES, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

通过在科学探究和论证的更广泛背景下构建亚里士多德的辩证法,本文旨在展示“有信誉的意见”对掌握科学原理的作用,如主题I.2所述。它认为,在调查的任何阶段,这种使用都不能意味着用辩证法的逻辑和内在目标来取代论证的逻辑和内在目标。然而,它也为辩证法的实质性(但仍然是适度的)贡献进行了辩护——超越了辩证法在抛弃矛盾观点方面得到充分证明的方法论作用,以及它(可能但与主题I.2的背景无关)通过反驳来证明非矛盾原则的应用。这种贡献包括提供对事实的初步描述,以便开始科学探究,如后验分析II.8所要求的那样。为了更好地理解辩证法在探究前示范阶段的建议位置是如何运作的,本文最后考察了物理学IV.1-5。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Aristotle on dialectic and definition in scientific inquiry
By framing Aristotle’s dialectic in the broader context of scientific inquiry and demonstration, this paper is aimed at showing of what use the “reputable opinions” can be for grasping the principles of sciences, as declared in Topics I.2. It argues that such a use cannot imply ‒ at any stage of inquiry ‒ a replacement of the logic and intrinsic goals of demonstration by those proper to dialectic. However, it also defends a substantive (but still modest) contribution of dialectic ‒ beyond its well-attested methodological role in discarding contradictory opinions and its (possible though not germane to the context of Topics I.2) application to proving the principle of non-contradiction by means of refutation. This contribution consists in providing the preliminary accounts of facts in order to have scientific inquiry started, as required in Posterior Analytics II.8. To better appreciate how the proposed location of dialectic in a pre-demonstrative stage of inquiry is operational, the paper finally examines Physics IV.1-5.
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
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
1
审稿时长
20 weeks
×
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