Hadi Samadi; Bahar Manbachi
Abstract
While the significance of beauty and symmetry in science has been a recurring theme in the discourse of many eminent scientists, the philosophical contemplation of aesthetics within the philosophy of science has garnered attention only in recent years. This paper examines the perspectives of renowned ...
Read More
While the significance of beauty and symmetry in science has been a recurring theme in the discourse of many eminent scientists, the philosophical contemplation of aesthetics within the philosophy of science has garnered attention only in recent years. This paper examines the perspectives of renowned scientists on the role of beauty and symmetry, revealing a spectrum of views where beauty is variously seen as a hallmark of truth or regarded with skepticism. We propose a psychological explanation for the scientific preoccupation with beauty and symmetry, suggesting that the human ability to recognize facial symmetry is an evolutionary adaptation. This adaptation's byproduct, we argue, is the inclination to appreciate symmetry in domains beyond the original adaptive purpose. Furthermore, the paper explores how portraiture often deviates from biological standards of beauty, indicating a potential to transcend biological predispositions. The final assertion posits that while the pursuit of beauty and symmetry can drive scientific inquiry, it may also impede the attainment of truth. Drawing parallels with artists who have transcended their biological inclinations, we suggest that scientists, too, might overcome these aesthetic biases.
Mohsen Khademi
Abstract
Paul Karl Feyerabend is one of the extremely influential philosophers of science in the second half of the twentieth century that his controversial works and opinions have reduplicated his reputation. This is his provocative works led to a misunderstanding for some academics and experts in philosophy, ...
Read More
Paul Karl Feyerabend is one of the extremely influential philosophers of science in the second half of the twentieth century that his controversial works and opinions have reduplicated his reputation. This is his provocative works led to a misunderstanding for some academics and experts in philosophy, so that someone called him the Worst Enemy of Science. In this article I'm going to show that this idea isn't true: Feyerabend feels hostile towards neither science, nor any tradition else. He fights only against dogmatic and destructive ideologies. Generally speaking, Feyerabend's ideas express only his hostility to technocracy and chauvinism of science. According to Feyerabend, modern science has a lot in common with the Medieval Church. He would maintain that nowadays science has been turned into a rigid religion whose prophets are scientists, whose miracles scientific discoveries and whose judgements scientific statements. Then it's up to us to put science in its place in order to make room for other traditions and human knowledge.
Khadijeh Ghorbani Sisakht; Mohammad hasan Karimi
Abstract
Overshadowed by the leading and well-known theories in the history of philosophy, some of the ideas of philosophers have always been neglected or less considered. The passage of time and the emergence of modern issues reveal new dimensions of such thoughts. Thinkers of this movement claim that transhumanism ...
Read More
Overshadowed by the leading and well-known theories in the history of philosophy, some of the ideas of philosophers have always been neglected or less considered. The passage of time and the emergence of modern issues reveal new dimensions of such thoughts. Thinkers of this movement claim that transhumanism holds deep historical-philosophical roots, and above all, they seek historical aspects of transhumanism in the era of modernism and modern philosophy. In this paper, we examine the evolution of transhumanism in the history of philosophy from the seventeenth to the twentieth century. Our results show that there have been many thinkers in the history of philosophy who have firmly believed in the advancement of man through technology, and have combined it with their philosophical ideas. They believed that many aspects of human nature, biology, and culture could be changed, strengthened, or eventually overcome using technology and human ingenuity. Although the capability of science and technology of the time was not such as to allow them to experiment most of their transhumanistic ambitions, put forwarding these ambitions made a historical-philosophical evolutionary trend that transhumanists use today to justify their ideas.
Ali Paya; alireza mansouri
Volume 8, Issue 16 , March 2019, , Pages 131-158
Abstract
There is a significant conceptual difference between science and technology. Epistemologically, the so-called 'applied science' is a redundant concept; it can be included under the category of technology. In this paper we discuss, from a philosophical point of view, some of the reasons for the conflation ...
Read More
There is a significant conceptual difference between science and technology. Epistemologically, the so-called 'applied science' is a redundant concept; it can be included under the category of technology. In this paper we discuss, from a philosophical point of view, some of the reasons for the conflation of science and technology. We shall further argue that such a conflation is not only an epistemological mistake, it also has many undesirable conceptual and practical consequences which impact on epistemological investigations as well as policy making in the fields of science and technology.There is a significant conceptual difference between science and technology. Epistemologically, the so-called 'applied science' is a redundant concept; it can be included under the category of technology. In this paper we discuss, from a philosophical point of view, some of the reasons for the conflation of science and technology. We shall further argue that such a conflation is not only an epistemological mistake, it also has many undesirable conceptual and practical consequences which impact on epistemological investigations as well as policy making in the fields of science and technology
aziz najafpoor; Fatemeh Gitipasand
Volume 7, Issue 13 , September 2017, , Pages 105-114
Abstract
In line with his cultural concerns and protecting various social traditions, Feyerabend denounces the rationality of modern science, emphasizes the principle of ‘anything goes’ and prioritizes individual freedom over the truth. Denying the absolute truth, Feyerabend tries to make room for ...
Read More
In line with his cultural concerns and protecting various social traditions, Feyerabend denounces the rationality of modern science, emphasizes the principle of ‘anything goes’ and prioritizes individual freedom over the truth. Denying the absolute truth, Feyerabend tries to make room for cultural pluralism and to remove science from the state of being the only reference for determining the authenticity of phenomena. In this paper, it is tried to show that Feyerabend in fact, after criticizing scientific rationality, raises a new rationality which its aim is freedom and has its own method and tradition. Besides some conflicts and ambiguities in his approach, he does not provide a reason for the preference of his rationality over other existing rationalities. We conclude that Feyerabend not only is not an epistemological anarchist, but has its own particular rationality.
rashid ghanei; Seyed Hassan Hosseini
Volume 5, Issue 9 , September 2015, , Pages 101-112
Abstract
Modern science, soul faculties, traditional knowledge, Islamic world, science, the power of imagination, the power of reason
Read More
Modern science, soul faculties, traditional knowledge, Islamic world, science, the power of imagination, the power of reason
