Next Article in Journal / Special Issue
Discursive Space and Its Consequences for Understanding Knowledge and Information
Previous Article in Journal
Post-Modernism, Agency, and Democracy
Previous Article in Special Issue
Induction and Epistemological Naturalism
Article Menu

Export Article

Open AccessArticle
Philosophies 2018, 3(4), 33; https://doi.org/10.3390/philosophies3040033

Natural Philosophy and the Sciences: Challenging Science’s Tunnel Vision

Philosophy and Cultural Inquiry, School of Arts, Social Science and the Humanities, Swinburne University of Technology, Hawthorn 3122, Victoria, Australia
Received: 31 August 2018 / Revised: 27 September 2018 / Accepted: 17 October 2018 / Published: 21 October 2018
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Contemporary Natural Philosophy and Philosophies)
Full-Text   |   PDF [342 KB, uploaded 13 November 2018]

Abstract

Prior to the nineteenth century, those who are now regarded as scientists were referred to as natural philosophers. With empiricism, science was claimed to be a superior form of knowledge to philosophy, and natural philosophy was marginalized. This claim for science was challenged by defenders of natural philosophy, and this debate has continued up to the present. The vast majority of mainstream scientists are comfortable in the belief that through applying the scientific method, knowledge will continue to accumulate, and that claims to knowledge outside science apart from practical affairs should not be taken seriously. This is referred to as scientism. It is incumbent on those who defend natural philosophy against scientism not only to expose the illusions and incoherence of scientism, but to show that natural philosophers can make justifiable claims to advancing knowledge. By focusing on a recent characterization and defense of natural philosophy along with a reconstruction of the history of natural philosophy, showing the nature and role of Schelling’s conception of dialectical thinking, I will attempt to identify natural philosophy as a coherent tradition of thought and defend it as something different from science and as essential to it, and essential to the broader culture and to civilization. View Full-Text
Keywords: natural philosophy; R.M. Unger; L. Smolin; Aristotle; F.W.J. Schelling; Naturphilosophie; A.N. Whitehead; Ivor Leclerc; dialectics natural philosophy; R.M. Unger; L. Smolin; Aristotle; F.W.J. Schelling; Naturphilosophie; A.N. Whitehead; Ivor Leclerc; dialectics
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited (CC BY 4.0).
SciFeed

Share & Cite This Article

MDPI and ACS Style

Gare, A. Natural Philosophy and the Sciences: Challenging Science’s Tunnel Vision. Philosophies 2018, 3, 33.

Show more citation formats Show less citations formats

Article Metrics

Article Access Statistics

1

Comments

[Return to top]
Philosophies EISSN 2409-9287 Published by MDPI AG, Basel, Switzerland RSS E-Mail Table of Contents Alert
Back to Top