You are here

PIERRE DUHEM’DE BİLİMLER SINIFLAMASI

CLASSIFICATION OF SCIENCES IN PIERRE DUHEM

Journal Name:

Publication Year:

Author NameUniversity of AuthorFaculty of Author
Abstract (2. Language): 
The sciences are parts of a great whole, to wit, the members of a magnificent system. Each of them has manifold relations to every other. Thus, there must be a science of the sciences, a science which determines the principles and conditions, the limits and relations, of the sciences. This science is philosophy which is the queen of all the sciences. One of the crucial problems with which philosophy should deal seems to be how may the sciences be rationally arranged and classified. Since before now there has been a continuous series of attempts to classify the sciences in philosophy. So, the classification of the sciences is one of the fundamental problems of philosophy and this paper is interested in setting forth Duhem’s classification of sciences as sciences of reasoning, empirical sciences and historical sciences.
Abstract (Original Language): 
Bilimler devasa bir bütünün parçalarıdırlar, diyeceğim, muhteşem bir dizgenin üyeleridirler. Bu parçaların her birinin biribirleriyle çoklu ilişkileri vardır. Şu halde, bilimlerin ilkelerini, koşullarını, sınırlarını ve birbirleriyle ilişkilerini belirleyip tayin eden bir başka bilimin olması gerekir. Bu bilim bütün bilimlerin kraliçesi olan felsefedir. İşte felsefenin ilgilenmesi gereken canalıcı problemlerden birisi bilimlerin ussal bir biçimde nasıl düzenlenip sınıflandırılacağı meselesidir. Felsefede öteden beri bilimleri sınıflama çabası hep olmuştur. Öyleyse, bilimlerin sınıflandırılması meselesi, felsefenin temel problemlerinden bir tanesidir; işte bu çalışma Pierre Duhem’in bilimleri; uslamlamalı, deneysel ve tarihsel bilimler olarak sınıflandırmasını gözler önüne serme çabasıdır.
354-372

REFERENCES

References: 

BACON, Francis (1906), The Advancement of Learning, Oxford University Press, London.
BACON, Francis (1960), The New Organon, Bobbs-Merrill, Indianapolis.
BAYLES, Charles A. (1965), Metaphysics, The Macmillan Company, London.
BOCHENSKI, J.M. (1968), The Methods of Contemporary Thought, Harper Torchbooks, New York.
COLLINGWOOD, R.G. (1997), Outlines of a Philosophy of Art, Thoemmes Press, Bristol.
COMTE, August (1988), Introduction to Positive Philosophy, (trans. by Frederick Ferre), Hackett Publishing Company, Cambridge.
DESCARTES, Rene (1955), Philosophical Works of Descartes, (trans. by E. Haldane and G. R. T. Ross), Dover, New York.
DUHEM, Pierre (1954), The Aim and Structure of Physical Theory, Princeton University Press, Princeton.
DUHEM, Pierre (1991), German Science (trans. by John Lyon), Open Court Publishing Company, La Salle.
FETZER, James H. (1993), Glossary of Epistemology/Philosophy of Science, Paragon House Pub. New York.
HOBBES, Thomas (1962), Leviathan, William Collins, London.
LEIBNIZ, G. (1996), New Essays Concerning Human Understanding (trans. by. Peter Remnant), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
LOCKE, John (1965), An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, Everyman’s Library, London.
LOSEE, John (1993), A Historical Introduction to the Philosophy of Science, Oxford University Press, Oxford. LOWINGER, Armand (1941), The Methodology of Pierre Duhem, Columbia University Press, New York.
REINHARDT, Kurt F. (1962), A Realistic Philosophy, Frederick Ungar Publishing Com., New York
SCRUTON, Roger (1996), An Intelligent Person’s Guide to Philosophy, Duckworth, London.
THIROUX, Jacques P. (1977), Ethics, Glencoe Press, London.
THOMPSON, Mel (2003), Philosophy of Science, Contemporary Books, Chicago.
VICO, Giambattista (1970), The New Science of Giambattista Vico, New York, Ithaca.
YOLTON, John W. (1965), Theory of Knowledge, The Macmillan Company, New York.

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com