Search results

The ethical distress of the (post)modern world stimulates and directs us to reflect our ethical and cultural grounds. Man is a transcendent being. He cannot reach or put in order immediate goods he needs if he is not prepared to acknowledge the grounds of his person and develop the virtues of prudence, love, hope, faith, wisdom, justice, courage, temperance etc. These are ethical questions concerning different worldviews and cannot be solved only by scientific methods. Many people who in the past did not care for religion as such, now take seriously religious personal and societal aspects of humane life. The fundamental crucial questions of man are ethical questions. They are in various ways related or perplexed with the question of faith and of science.

The paper poses the question whether the economics of science could be the key to economic methodology. First, the sociology of science, which tries to put science in social context, is described. Then, the economic approach to science, inspired by Tullock, Stigler and Becker, is explained. We point out the problem of circle, according to which putting science in context does not imply relativism as concerns the truth. This conclusion underlines the Popperian message of the paper. Adapted from the source document.

Does science think or does it not think, this traditionally philosophical dilemma has today become, according to the central thesis of this essay, inherent to science itself. The author argues that it is in the interest of contemporary science itself to affirm itself as thought. It is precisely this perspective of science as thought which implies the ethical dimension of science. This is not to be understood in the sense of the necessity of some prohibitive instance such as an ethical demand, but rather in the sense that science, for its own internal reasons, should not give up regarding its desire: to be, both, an experiment of thought & a condition for thought. Only by being useful for thought can science be useful for something else. Adapted from the source document.

The article deals with the relationship of philosophy to science in the work of Martin Heidegger, Dominique Lecourt, & Alain Badiou. It concentrates on Badiou's & Lecourt's attempt to reject Heidegger's thesis "Science does not think" -- for Heidegger science is namely grounded in philosophy. Following the basic presentation of Lecourt's analysis of science & Baidou's analysis of mathematics, the internal problems of their conceptions are thoroughly investigated. Adapted from the source document.

A review of Thomas S. Kuhn's arguments against the unification of the philosophy & history of science focuses on his definition & defense of the interdisciplinary dialogue between the two sciences. While they can explain a given problem for their particular points of view, their perspectives cannot be synthesized. Kuhn's work on the scientific revolutions gives rise to a new science of the development of sciences that could unify the historical analysis of scientific development with the rational reconstruction of scientific developments. 7 References. Adapted from the source document.

Karl Popper's distinction between science & metaphysics (pseudoscience) is analyzed, arguing that the principle of demarcation (falsification) cannot support Popper's thesis. Although falsification can be useful for distinguishing between empirical & nonempirical sciences, it also leads to clustering logic & mathematics, theory of induction, metaphysical theories, & philosophy in general. It is argued that Popper misinterprets A. Tarski's (1949) notion of the pursuit of truth in science & assumes that it can meet some objective criteria. One of the major problems of Popper's view of science in his theory of verisimilitude, allegedly capable of solving the problems of correspondence & objectivity. Instead, a blend of Popper's & Feyerabend's positions on scientific progress is suggested. 17 References. Adapted from the source document.

The article reconsiders the problematics of the "Deleuzian heritage" & especially the role played by the Deleuzian concept of deterritorialization in the conceptual framework of the Empire by Hardt & Negri. The concept of deterritorialization has a very special place in Deleuze's theory for it simultaneously makes possible & impossible his analysis of capitalism as well as his theory of the political & democracy. Finally, some consequences following from the ambiguities of this concept in Deleuze are shown for the theoretical edifice of the Empire. Adapted from the source document.

The existing empirical studies examined the impact of different variables, such as common language, economic, cultural and geographical factors, on migration. However, none of the studies deals with the social security systems including their coordination as a relevant explanatory factor. The paper focuses on the social security systems in Europe, their mutual coordination and their influence on international migration. The influence of social systems on economic migration can be twofold: influencing the labour migration, i.e. migrants who move for work, and also influencing the benefit migration, i.e. migrants who move in order to receive social benefits. We present the advanced migration model extended by the factors of social security coordination. The main finding is that the labour migration prevails significantly over the benefit migration. Role of social systems as social magnets was not proved to be statistically significant. Adapted from the source document.