The Quarterly Journal of Philosophical Investigations

نوع مقاله : مقاله علمی- پژوهشی

نویسنده

محقق، بنیاد Anthroopos، آمستردام، عضو بین‌المللی دانشکده تحقیقات فلسفه هلند(OZSW)، دانشکده فلسفه، دانشگاه لیدن، هلند

10.22034/jpiut.2021.13840

چکیده

Herman Philipse considers “religious beliefs, faith and religion [to be] incompatible with science or reason”; he defines religion scientifically and specifically rejects religious doctrine. He describes reason “… as the whole of methods of empirical scientific research and critical discursive thinking as they have evolved in the scientific tradition and will continue to develop in the future” and he defines “… the phenomenon of conscience as a mental organ that can be scientifically explained and that makes the religious explanation superfluous …”. Herman Philipse classifies science as the highest in rank, discards religion and sees philosophy, a rational view of the world, as based solely on the sciences. For his subject, Hans Achterhuis “… primarily cites biologists, ethologists and evolutionary psychologists with a philosophical interest” because “they presently have more to offer [him] than do his immediate colleagues”. Furthermore, “… it will be clear that ethologists and sociobiologists are of the opinion that the violent behaviour of human beings must be understood in part from the point of view of the evolutionary history of the sort ….. most philosophers and anthropologists are not aware of this. Their considerations suggest that violence only entered our world together with humankind”. Achterhuis’s choice is a “historic concept of violence”.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

The Interaction of Science and Philosophy in the Present Age Two Dutch Philosophers: Herman Philipse and Hans Achterhuis

نویسنده [English]

  • Hans Dassen

Researcher, Anthroopos Foundation, Amsterdam, International Member of the Dutch Research School of Philosophy (OZSW), Faculty of Philosophy, University of Leiden, The Netherlands

چکیده [English]

Herman Philipse considers “religious beliefs, faith and religion [to be] incompatible with science or reason”; he defines religion scientifically and specifically rejects religious doctrine. He describes reason “… as the whole of methods of empirical scientific research and critical discursive thinking as they have evolved in the scientific tradition and will continue to develop in the future” and he defines “… the phenomenon of conscience as a mental organ that can be scientifically explained and that makes the religious explanation superfluous …”. Herman Philipse classifies science as the highest in rank, discards religion and sees philosophy, a rational view of the world, as based solely on the sciences. For his subject, Hans Achterhuis “… primarily cites biologists, ethologists and evolutionary psychologists with a philosophical interest” because “they presently have more to offer [him] than do his immediate colleagues”. Furthermore, “… it will be clear that ethologists and sociobiologists are of the opinion that the violent behaviour of human beings must be understood in part from the point of view of the evolutionary history of the sort ….. most philosophers and anthropologists are not aware of this. Their considerations suggest that violence only entered our world together with humankind”. Achterhuis’s choice is a “historic concept of violence”.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • philosophy
  • anthropology
  • science
  • communication
  • the playing field of illusion
  • truth
  • Power
  • Dagenais J.J., 1972, Models of Man, A Phenomenological Critique of Some Paradigms in the Human Sciences, Martinus Nijhoff/The Hague, ISBN 90 247 1290 4
  • Tallon A., Williams P., 1982, Memorial Minutes James Joseph Dagenais 1923-1981, Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association, Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/3131239
  • Cheung Chan Fai, 2001, Human Nature and Human Existence – On the Problem of the Distinction Between Man and Animal, pp. 365-383
  • Heidegger M., 2010, Über den Humanismus, Verlag Vittorio Klostermann
  • Karl Popper (1902-1994) on the significance of imagination for science, later elaborated for politics in The Open Society and its Enemies (1945)
  • Dassen J.L.M., 2013, A new philosophy of man & humanism, Stichting Anthroopos Amsterdam, e-book, ISBN 978 90 8666 293 7 http://ow.ly/NtNnw
  • Philipse H., 2007, Atheïstisch manifest en de onredelijkheid van religie, Met een voorwoord van Ayaan Hirsi Ali, ISBN 978 90 351 26541
  • Achterhuis H.J., 2008, Met alle geweld, Een filosofische zoektocht, ISBN 978 90 477 0127 9
CAPTCHA Image