Feyerabend’s Alternative Theories within Goodman’s Worldmaking

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F49777513%3A23330%2F20%3A43957086" target="_blank" >RIV/49777513:23330/20:43957086 - isvavai.cz</a>

Výsledek na webu

<a href="https://www.organonf.com/journal/orgf-2020-27302/" target="_blank" >https://www.organonf.com/journal/orgf-2020-27302/</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.31577/ORGF.2020.27302" target="_blank" >10.31577/ORGF.2020.27302</a>

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

Feyerabend’s Alternative Theories within Goodman’s Worldmaking

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

The main purpose of this paper is to compare two pluralistic approaches to knowledge, Goodman’s theory of worldmaking and Feyerabend’s methodological anarchism. It therefore examines firstly, the concept of world-versions, which according to Goodman create our worlds and at the same time are crucial for achieving a better understanding of reality; and secondly, the concept of alternative theories which are built upon pluralism and, according to Feyerabend, secure knowledge and make scientific progress possible. Feyerabend’s concept has been rejected by many, seemingly for its lack of limitations. In line with this argument, I propose that based on the comparison of these two pluralistic approaches, the alternative theories can be understood as a part of worldmaking, for Goodman’s theory has wider applicability since it encompasses not only science but also art. Furthermore, I suggest adopting Goodman’s principle of rightness, the criterion of functionality in his worldmaking, as a criterion within Feyerabend’s methodological anarchism when establishing the prevailing theory. It is to be expected that such a juxtaposition will uncover inconsistencies, in particular regarding boundless relativism and the vague terminology in both conceptions.

Název v anglickém jazyce

Feyerabend’s Alternative Theories within Goodman’s Worldmaking

Popis výsledku anglicky

The main purpose of this paper is to compare two pluralistic approaches to knowledge, Goodman’s theory of worldmaking and Feyerabend’s methodological anarchism. It therefore examines firstly, the concept of world-versions, which according to Goodman create our worlds and at the same time are crucial for achieving a better understanding of reality; and secondly, the concept of alternative theories which are built upon pluralism and, according to Feyerabend, secure knowledge and make scientific progress possible. Feyerabend’s concept has been rejected by many, seemingly for its lack of limitations. In line with this argument, I propose that based on the comparison of these two pluralistic approaches, the alternative theories can be understood as a part of worldmaking, for Goodman’s theory has wider applicability since it encompasses not only science but also art. Furthermore, I suggest adopting Goodman’s principle of rightness, the criterion of functionality in his worldmaking, as a criterion within Feyerabend’s methodological anarchism when establishing the prevailing theory. It is to be expected that such a juxtaposition will uncover inconsistencies, in particular regarding boundless relativism and the vague terminology in both conceptions.

Druh

J_SC - Článek v periodiku v databázi SCOPUS

CEP obor

—

OECD FORD obor

60301 - Philosophy, History and Philosophy of science and technology

Projekt

—

Návaznosti

S - Specificky vyzkum na vysokych skolach

Rok uplatnění

2020

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Název periodika

Organon F

ISSN

1335-0668

e-ISSN

—

Svazek periodika

27

Číslo periodika v rámci svazku

3

Stát vydavatele periodika

SK - Slovenská republika

Počet stran výsledku

23

Strana od-do

302-324

Kód UT WoS článku

—

EID výsledku v databázi Scopus

2-s2.0-85091357220