Abstract
Bernard Lavor and John Kadvany argue that Lakatos’s Hegelian approach to the philosophy of mathematics and science enabled him to overcome all competing philosophies. His use of the approach Hegel developed in his Phenomenology enabled him to show how mathematics and science develop, how they are open-ended, and that they are not subject to rules, even though their rationality may be understood after the fact. Hegel showed Lakatos how to falsify the past to make progress in the present. A critique based on normal standards of fairness and honesty finds this argument an attack on rationality. The similarity of the methods Lakatos used as a Stalinist politician and those he used as a philosopher are pointed out. The Hegelian interpretation of his philosophy is an excuse for his misdeeds.
Subject
Social Sciences (miscellaneous),Philosophy
Reference19 articles.
1. Agassi, Joseph. 1966. Sensationalism. Mind 75:1-24.
2. Agassi, Joseph. 1973. When should one reject evidence in favor of an hypothesis? Ratio 15:183-205.
3. Agassi, Joseph. 1974. Postscript: The futility of fighting Philistines: Karl Popper’s Objective Knowledge. Philosophia 4:163-201.
4. Agassi, Joseph. 1991. Popper’s demarcation of science refuted. Methodology and Science 24:1-7.
5. Agassi, Joseph, and Charles Sawyer. 1980. Was Lakatos an elitist? Ratio 22:61-63.
Cited by
3 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
1. Imre Lakatos;SpringerBriefs in Philosophy;2014
2. Philosophical Anthropology Can Help Social Scientists Learn from Empirical Tests;Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour;2007-09
3. New Insights on Young Popper;Journal of the History of Ideas;2005