نوع مقاله : مقاله علمی- پژوهشی
نویسندگان
1 دانشجوی کارشناسی ارشد گروه فلسفه علم، دانشگاه صنعتی شریف، تهران، ایران.
2 استادیار گروه فلسفه علم، دانشگاه صنعتی شریف، تهران، ایران
چکیده
ون‌فراسن با مطرح کردن استدلال گروه بد، نقدی مهم به استنتاج به قصد بهترین تبیین وارد کرده و واقع‌گرایی علمی را با چالش مواجه ساخته است. گذشته از واقع‌گرایی علمی و با توجه به اتکای روش‌های علمی امروز به استنتاج به قصد بهترین تبیین، این نقد در سطحی عمیق‌تر تهدیدی جدی برای اعتبار کاوش علمی ایجاد می‌کند. در این مقاله تلاش خواهیم کرد تا با توجه به ساختار جامعه علمی، راهی برای مقابله با این تهدید ارائه دهیم. برخی ویژگی‌های ساختاری جامعه علمی معاصر باعث محدود شدن کاوش علمی به علمِ برآمده از سنت غربی و محرومیت آن از امکانات نظری موجود در سنت‌های گوناگون شده است. ادعای اصلی مقاله این است که برای توسعه علم، توجه به سنت‌های گوناگون می‌‌تواند راه مناسبی جهت گسترش کاوش علمی و مقابله با تهدید مذکور در پیش روی جامعه علمی قرار دهد. در بخش اول نشان خواهیم داد که استدلال گروه بد از چه رهگذری اعتبار کاوش علمی را مورد تهدید قرار می‌دهد. در بخش دوم درخصوص ارتباط تنگاتنگ میان علم و سنت بحث می‌کنیم و سپس وضعیت این ارتباط را در جامعه علمی معاصر مورد بررسی قرار می‌دهیم. بخش نهایی به مطرح کردن ایده کثرت‌گرایی درخصوص بهره‌مندی از امکانات نظری سنت‌های گوناگون در کاوش علمی، به عنوان راه حل پیشنهادی برای مقابله با این تهدید اختصاص یافته است.
کلیدواژه‌ها
موضوعات
عنوان مقاله [English]
Science and Tradition: Towards a Pluralistic Scientific Society
نویسندگان [English]
- Amir Motesharei 1
- Mostafa Taqavi 2
1 M.A. in Philosophy of Science Department, Sharif University of Technology, Tehran, Iran.
2 Assistant Professor, Philosophy of Science Department, Sharif University of Technology, Tehran, Iran
چکیده [English]
Having offered the “argument from bad lot”, Bas van Fraassen has raised an important criticism on the Inference to the Best Explanation (IBE) and challenged scientific realism. Regardless of scientific realism, and given the reliance of today's scientific methods on IBE, this criticism poses a deeper threat to the validity of scientific enquiry. In this article, we will try to provide a way to deal with this threat, according to the structure of the scientific community. Some structural features of the contemporary scientific community have caused the scientific enquiry to be limited to the science derived from the Western tradition and deprived it of the theoretical opportunities of various traditions. The main claim of this article is that paying attention to different traditions together to produce science is a good way to expand scientific enquiry and deal with the mentioned threat. In the first section, we will depict how the argument from bad lot threatens the validity of scientific enquiry. In the second section, we discuss the close relationship between science and tradition, and then examine the status of this relationship in the contemporary scientific society. The final section is devoted to proposing the idea of pluralism regarding the use of the theoretical opportunities of different traditions in scientific enquiry, as a proposed solution to counter this threat.
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
- Inference to the Best Explanation
- Non-Western Traditions
- Scientific Monopoly
- Scientific Pluralism
- Anderson, E. (2004) "Uses of Value Judgments in Science: A General Argument, with Lessons from a Case Study of Feminist Research on Divorce." Hypatia, 19(1): 1–24.
- S. (2020) "Indigenous Science for a World in Crisis". Public Archaeology, 19: 1-16. 10.1080/14655187.2020.1781492.
- Avin, S. (2018) "Policy considerations for random allocation of research funds". Roar Transactions, 6(1): 1.
- Beck, A. H. (2004) "The Flexner Report and the Standardization of American Medical Education". Journal of the American Medical Association 291: 2139-2140.
- Behmanesh, E., Mojahedi, M., Saghebi, R., Ayati, M. H., Bahrami Taghanaki, H. R., Allameh, H., Salmannezhad, H., Mahmoudpour, Z. & Mozaffarpour, S. (2015) "Comparison between the “Theory of Arkan” (four elements) in traditional Persian medicine and the “theory of five elements” in traditional Chinese medicine". Journal of Research on History of Medicine, 4(2), 73–86.
- Bhaskar, R. (1975) A Realist Theory of Science. London and New York: Routledge.
- Boudreau, K. J., Guinan, E. C., Lakhani, K. R., & Riedi, C. (2016) "Looking across and looking beyond the knowledge frontier: Intellectual distance, novelty, and resource allocation in science". Management Science, 62(10): 2765–2783.
- Bucchi, Massimiano (2004) Science in Society: An Introduction to Social Studies of Science. Routledge.
- Burtt, E. A. (1925) The metaphysical foundations of modern physical science; A historical and critical essay. London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner & Co.
- De Solla Price, D. (1963) Little science, big science. New York: Columbia University Press.
- Douglas, H. (2000) "Inductive Risk and Values in Science". Philosophy of Science, 67(4): 559–79.
- Douglas, H. (2013) "The Value of Cognitive Values". Philosophy of Science, 80(5), 796–806.
- Duffy, T. P. (2011) "The Flexner Report--100 years later". The Yale journal of biology and medicine, 84(3): 269–276.
- Duhem, P. ([1914], 1954) The Aim and Structure of Physical Theory. Trans. from 2nd ed. by Philip P. Wiener. Originally published as La The ́orie Physique: Son Objet, et sa Structure (Paris: Marcel Rivie` ra & Cie). Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
- Fang, H. (2010) "Peer review and over-competitive research funding fostering mainstream opinion to monopoly". Scientometrics, 87(2): 293–301. doi:10.1007/s11192-010-0323-4
- Feyerabend, P. (1975) Against Method. London: New Left Books.
- Flexner, A. (1910) Medical Education in the United States and Canada: A Report To the Carnegie Foundation For the Advancement of Teaching.New York, NY, USA: The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.
- Galison, P., & Hevly, B. (1992) Big science: The growth of large-scale research. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
- Golshani, M. (2000) "How to make sense of Islamic science". American Journal of Islamic Social Sciences, 17(3), 1.
- M. (2020) "The Role of Metaphysics: As a Bridge between Science and Religion". Philosophical Investigations, 14(32), 369-384.
- Hanson, N. R. (1958) Patterns of Discovery. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Haufe, C. (2013) "Why do funding agencies favor hypothesis testing?" Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 44, 363–374.
- W. (1973) "Tradition in Science". Science and Public Affairs, 10(29), 4-10.
- W. (1985) Werner Heisenberg Collected Works. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
- Hirsh, A. E. (2009) "Guest column: A new kind of big science". New York Times (Opinionator: Exclusive Online Commentary from the Times), published Jan 13. opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/01/13/ guest-column-a-new-kind -of-big-science/. Accessed 16 July 2010.
- Jameson, J. L., Dennis, A. S. F., Kasper, L., Hauser, S. L., Longo, D. L., & Loscalzo, J. (2018) "Comple- mentary, alternative and integrative health approaches". In J. L. Jameson, A. S. Fauci, D. L. Kasper, S. L. Hauser, D. L. Longo, & J. Loscalzo (Eds.), Harrison’s principles of internal medicine 20e. McGraw-Hill: New York, NY.
- Kafaee, M., Taqavi, M. (2021) "The Value of ‘Traditionality’: The Epistemological and Ethical Significance of Non-western Alternatives in Science". Science and Engineering Ethics, 27(1):1-20.
- Kawagley, A., Norris-Tull, D. (1995) "Incorporation of the world views of indigenous cultures: A dilemma in the practice and teaching of western science". In Paper presented to the third international history, philosophy, and science teaching conference, Minneapolis.
- Kolata, G. (2009) "Playing it Safe in Cancer Research", New York Times (Late ed. - Final ed.), published June 28. Retrieved July 16, 2010, from NewsBank online database (Access World News).
- Kuhn, T. S. (1962) The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
- Lakatos, I. (1978) The Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes: Philosophical Papers (J. Worrall & G. Currie, Eds.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Lipton, Peter (2004) Inference to the Best Explanation. London and New York: Routledge/Taylor and Francis Group.
- Luukkonen, T. (2012) "Conservatism and risk-taking in peer review: Emerging ERC practices". Research Evaluation, 21: 48–60.
- Lycan, William G. (1988) Judgement and Justification. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- MacIntyre, A. (1988) Whose Justice? Which Rationality?. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.
- Maizes, V., Rakel, D., & Niemiec, C. (2009) "Integrative medicine and patient-centered care". Explore (NY). 5(5): 277-89. Doi: 10.1016/j.explore.2009.06.008. PMID: 19733814.
- Pauli, W. (1955) "Science and Western Thought". in Enz, C. P. & Meyenn, K. eds. (1994) Wolfgang Pauli: Writings on Physics and Philosophy. New York: Springer: 137-148.
- Plantinga, A. (1996) "Science: Augustinian or Duhemian". Faith and Philosophy, 13(3): 368–394.
- Popper, K. R. ([1934], 1959) The logic of scientific discovery. London: Hutchinson.
- Psillos, S. (1996) "On Van Fraassen’s Critique of Abductive Reasoning". Philosophical Quarterly46 (182): 31-47.
- Ribeiro, C. (2014) "Karl Popper’s Conception of Metaphysics and its Problems". Principia: an international journal of epistemology, 18: 209.
- Schrodinger, E. (1944) What is Life? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
- Schupbach, J. N. (2014) "Is the Bad Lot Objection Just Misguided?" Erkenntnis 79 (1):55-64.
- Stanford, P. K. (2006) Exceeding our grasp: Science, history, and the problem of unconceived alternatives. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Stanford, P. K. (2015) "Unconceived alternatives and conservatism in science: the impact of professionalization, peer-review, and Big Science". Synthese, 1-18. doi:10.1007/s11229-015-0856-4
- Steel, A., Adams, J. (2011) "The Interface Between Tradition and Science: Naturopaths’ Perspectives of Modern Practice". The Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine, 17(10), 967–972. doi:10.1089/acm.2010.0497
- van Fraassen, Bas C. (1989) Laws and Symmetry. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Wagner, C. S., Alexander, J. (2013) "Evaluating transformative research programmes: A case study of the NSF Small Grants for Exploratory Research programme". Research Evaluation, 22(3).
- Ward, Z. B. (2021) "On Value-Laden Science". Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, Part A. 85, 54–62.
- WHO (World Health Organization) (2013)WHO traditional medicine strategy: 2014-2023. Retrieved from World Health Organization. https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/92455
- Zahabi, S. A. (2019) "Avicenna’s approach to health: A reciprocal interaction between medicine and Islamic philosophy". Journal of Religion and Health, 58(5), 1698–1712.
)
ارسال نظر در مورد این مقاله