Tom 20 Nr 2 (2023)
Artykuły

Feyerabend on Pluralism, Contingency, and Humility

PDF (English)
DOI: https://doi.org/10.53763/fag.2023.20.2.232

Opublikowane 10.05.2024

Słowa kluczowe

  • contingency,
  • Feyerabend,
  • historiography,
  • pluralism

Jak cytować

Kidd I.J., Feyerabend on Pluralism, Contingency, and Humility, Filozoficzne Aspekty Genezy, 2024, t. 20, nr 2, https://doi.org/10.53763/fag.2023.20.2.232

Prawa autorskie (c) 2023 Filozoficzne Aspekty Genezy

Creative Commons License

Utwór dostępny jest na licencji Creative Commons Uznanie autorstwa – Użycie niekomercyjne 4.0 Międzynarodowe.

Abstrakt

Throughout the writings of Paul Feyerabend, there are constant references to the historical contingency of the scientific enterprise, often accompanied by philosophical claims about the significance of that contingency. This paper presents those contingentist claims, situates them in the context of more recent work on the contingency of science, and offers an interpretation of their significance. I suggest that Feyerabend’s sense of contingency was connected to his defences of pluralism, and also to the “conquest of abundance” narrative developed in the very late writings.

PDF (English)

Pobrania

Brak dostęþnych danych do wyświetlenia.

Bibliografia

  1. Aylward Alex, Against Defaultism and Towards Localism in the Contingency/Inevitability Conversation: Or, why we Should shut up about Putting-up, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 2019, Vol. 74, pp. 30–41, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsa.2019.01.008.
    Zobacz w Google Scholar
  2. Bouterse Jeroen, Contingentism for Historians, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 2022, Vol. 96, pp. 27–34, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsa.2022.08.001.
    Zobacz w Google Scholar
  3. Bowler Peter, Darwin Deleted: Imagining a World without Darwin, University of Chicago Press, Chicago 2012.
    Zobacz w Google Scholar
  4. Brown Matthew J., The Abundant World: Paul Feyerabend’s Metaphysics of Science, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 2016, Vol. 57, pp. 142–154, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsa.2015.11.015.
    Zobacz w Google Scholar
  5. Chang Hasok, We Have Never Been Whiggish (About Phlogiston), Centaurus 2009, Vol. 51, No. 4, pp. 239–264, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0498.2009.00150.x.
    Zobacz w Google Scholar
  6. Chang Hasok, The Hidden History of Phlogiston: How Philosophical Failure can Generate Historiographical Refinement, Hyle 2010, Vol. 16, No. 2, pp. 47–79.
    Zobacz w Google Scholar
  7. Chang Hasok, Is Water H2O? Evidence, Realism, Pluralism, Springer, Dordrecht 2012.
    Zobacz w Google Scholar
  8. Chang Hasok, Cultivating Contingency: A Case for Scientific Pluralism, in: Lená Soler, Emiliano Trizio and Andrew Pickering (eds.), Science as it Could Have Been: Discussing the Contingency/Inevitability Problem, Pittsburgh University Press, Pittsburgh 2015, pp. 359–382.
    Zobacz w Google Scholar
  9. Clarke Steve and Walsh Adrian, Imperialism, Progress, Developmental Teleology, and Interdisciplinary Unification, International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 2014, Vol. 27, No. 3, pp. 341–351, https://doi.org/10.1080/02698595.2013.825493.
    Zobacz w Google Scholar
  10. Cooper David E., The Measure of Things: Humanism, Humility, and Mystery, Clarendon Press, Oxford 2002.
    Zobacz w Google Scholar
  11. Cushing James T., Quantum Mechanics: Historical Contingency and the Copenhagen Hegemony, University of Chicago Press, Chicago 1994.
    Zobacz w Google Scholar
  12. Farrell Robert, Feyerabend and Scientific Values: Tightrope-Walking Rationality, Kluwer, Dordrecht 2003.
    Zobacz w Google Scholar
  13. Feyerabend Paul K., Against Method. Third Edition, Verso, London 1993.
    Zobacz w Google Scholar
  14. Feyerabend Paul K., Concluding Unphilosophical Conversation, in: Gonzalo Munévar (ed.), Beyond Reason: Essays on the Philosophy of Paul K. Feyerabend, Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science, Vol. 132, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht — Boston — London 1991, pp. 433–448.
    Zobacz w Google Scholar
  15. Feyerabend Paul K., Conquest of Abundance: A Tale of Abstraction Versus the Richness of Being, Bert Terpstra (ed.), University of Chicago Press, Chicago 2001.
    Zobacz w Google Scholar
  16. Feyerabend Paul K., Farewell to Reason, Verso, London 1987.
    Zobacz w Google Scholar
  17. Feyerabend Paul K., Introduction: Proliferation and Realism as Methodological Principles, in: Paul K. Feyerabend, Philosophical Papers, Vol. 1, Realism, Rationalism & Scientific Method, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge — New York — Port Chester — Melbourne — Sydney 1981, pp. 139–145.
    Zobacz w Google Scholar
  18. Feyerabend Paul K., Philosophy of Nature, in: Eric Oberheim and Helmut Heit (eds.), Polity, Cambridge 2016.
    Zobacz w Google Scholar
  19. Feyerabend Paul K., Science in a Free Society, New Left Books, London 1978.
    Zobacz w Google Scholar
  20. Hacking Ian, The Social Construction of What?, Harvard University Press, Cambridge 1999.
    Zobacz w Google Scholar
  21. Hacking Ian, How Inevitable are the Results of Successful Science?, Philosophy of Science 2000, Vol. 67, pp. 58–71.
    Zobacz w Google Scholar
  22. Husserl Edmund, The Crisis of European Sciences and Transcendental Phenomenology, Northwestern University Press, Evanston 1970.
    Zobacz w Google Scholar
  23. Kidd Ian James, Historical Contingency and the Impact of Scientific Imperialism, International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 2013, Vol. 27, No. 3, pp. 317–326, https://doi.org/10.1080/02698595.2013.825494.
    Zobacz w Google Scholar
  24. Kidd Ian James, Inevitability, Contingency, and Epistemic Humility, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 2016, Vol. 55, pp. 12–19, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsa.2015.08.006.
    Zobacz w Google Scholar
  25. Kidd Ian James, Humility, Contingency, and Pluralism in the Sciences, in: Mark Alfano, Michael Lynch, and Alessandra Tanesini (eds.), The Routledge Handbook on the Philosophy of Humility, Routledge, New York 2020, pp. 346–358.
    Zobacz w Google Scholar
  26. Kidd Ian James, Reawakening to Wonder: Feyerabend, Science, and Scientism, in: Karim Bschir and Jamie Shaw (eds.), Interpreting Feyerabend, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge 2021, pp. 172–190.
    Zobacz w Google Scholar
  27. Kinzel Katerina, State of the Field: Are the Results of Science Contingent or Inevitable?, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 2015, Vol. 52, pp. 55–66, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsa.2015.05.013.
    Zobacz w Google Scholar
  28. Kusch Martin, Relativism in Feyerabend’s Later Writings, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 2016, Vol. 57, pp. 106¬–113.
    Zobacz w Google Scholar
  29. Lloyd Elizabeth A., Feyerabend, Mill, and Pluralism, Philosophy of Science 1997, Vol. 64/4, Feyerabend, Mill, and Pluralism, Philosophy of Science 1997, Vol. 64, Supplement. Proceedings of the 1996 Biennial Meetings of the Philosophy of Science Association. Part II: Symposia Papers, pp. S396–S407.
    Zobacz w Google Scholar
  30. Martin Joseph D., Is the Contingentist/Inevitabilist Debate a Matter of Degrees?, Philosophy of Science 2013, Vol. 80, No. 5, pp. 919–930, https://doi.org/10.1086/674003.
    Zobacz w Google Scholar
  31. Munévar Gonzalo, Historical Antecedents to the Philosophy of Paul Feyerabend, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 2013, Vol. 57, No. 3, pp. 9–16, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsa.2015.11.002.
    Zobacz w Google Scholar
  32. Oberheim Eric, Feyerabend’s Philosophy, Walter de Gruyter, Berlin 2006.
    Zobacz w Google Scholar
  33. Pickering Andrew, Constructing Quarks: A Sociological History of Particle Physics, University of Chicago Press, Chicago 1984.
    Zobacz w Google Scholar
  34. Preston Jonh, Feyerabend: Philosophy, Science and Society, Polity Press, Oxford 1996.
    Zobacz w Google Scholar
  35. Radick Gregory, Other Histories, other Biologies, in: Anthony O’Hear (ed.), Philosophy, Biology, and Life, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge — New York — Melbourne 2005, pp. 21–47.
    Zobacz w Google Scholar
  36. Radick Gregory, Counterfactuals and the Historian of Science, Isis 2008, Vol. 99, pp. 547–551.
    Zobacz w Google Scholar
  37. Radick Gregory, Disputed Inheritance: The Battle over Mendel and the Future of Biology, University of Chicago Press, Chicago 2023.
    Zobacz w Google Scholar
  38. Rheinberger Hans-Jörg, On Historicising Epistemology: An Essay, Cultural Memory in the Present, trans. David Fernbach, Stanford University Press, Stanford 2010.
    Zobacz w Google Scholar
  39. Rorty Richard, Contingency, Irony, and Solidarity, Cambrdige University Press, Cambridge 1989.
    Zobacz w Google Scholar
  40. Sankey Howard, Scientific Realism and the Inevitability of Science, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 2008, Vol. 39, No. 2, pp. 259–264, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsa.2008.03.018.
    Zobacz w Google Scholar
  41. Soler Lená, Are the Results of our Science Contingent or Inevitable?, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 2008, Vol. 39, pp. 221–229, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsa.2015.05.013.
    Zobacz w Google Scholar
  42. Soler Lená, Revealing the Analytical Structure and some Intrinsic Major Difficulties of the Contingentist/Inevitabilist Issue, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 2008, Vol. 39, No. 2, pp. 230–241, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsa.2008.03.015.
    Zobacz w Google Scholar
  43. Soler Lená, Trizio Emiliano and Pickering Andrew, Science as It Could Have Been: Discussing the Contingency/Inevitability Problem, The University of Pittsburgh Press, Pittsburgh 2015.
    Zobacz w Google Scholar
  44. Tambolo Luca, An Unappreciated Merit of Counterfactual Histories of Science, Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 2020, Vol. 81, A:101183, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsc.2019.101183.
    Zobacz w Google Scholar
  45. Tambolo Luca and Cevolani Gustavo, Multiple Discoveries, Inevitability, and Scientific Realism, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 2021, Vol. 90, pp. 30–38, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsa.2021.09.001.
    Zobacz w Google Scholar
  46. Trizio Emiliano, How Many Sciences for one World? Contingency and the Success of Science, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 2008, Vol. 39, No. 2, pp. 253–258, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsa.2008.03.017.
    Zobacz w Google Scholar
  47. Virmajoki Veli, Could Science be Interestingly Different?, Journal of the Philosophy of History 2018, Vol. 12, No. 2, pp. 303–324, https://doi.org/10.1163/18722636-12341388.
    Zobacz w Google Scholar