Abstract
AbstractElsewhere I have tried to provide the justification of both the irreducible (transcendental) distinction of science and philosophy and their inevitable (naturalistic) complementarity. Unlike empirical science, philosophy has no limit whatever as far as its possible objects are concerned. To say that there is no limit whatever to the possible objects of philosophy is to say that, strictly speaking, it has no object at all and must find its object outside itself, that is, in common sense knowledge and the natural and human sciences. Against the background of this conception, the paper argues that philosophy of science, as a critical reflection on common sense knowledge and the natural or human sciences, inherits from philosophy in general this two-faced Janus nature, which in the philosophy of science shapes the epistemological status of the discipline in an even more prominent way. To show this in detail, the paper enunciates eleven theses that derive from the intimate connection of unity and distinction that exists between philosophy of science on the one hand and the particular and specialized scientific knowledge on the other.
Funder
ministero dell’istruzione, dell’università e della ricerca
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Philosophy,Mathematics (miscellaneous)
Reference41 articles.
1. Agazzi E (2021) The multiple aspects of the philosophy of science. Axiomathes, S.I. Epistemologia (this issue)
2. Bridgman PW (1927) The logic of modern physics. MacMillan, New York
3. Buzzoni M (1990) Zum Begriff der Person: Person, Apriori und Ontologie bei Heidegger und Ricoeur. In: Papenfuss D, Pöggeler O (eds) Zur philosophischen Aktualität Heideggers. Bd. 2: Im Gespräch der Zeit, pp. 227–253. Klostermann, Frankfurt a.M.
4. Buzzoni M (1995) Scienza e tecnica. Teoria ed esperienza nelle scienze della natura. Studium, Rom
5. Buzzoni M (2011a) Kant und das Gedankenexperiment. Deut Z Philos 59:93–107