Why Does History Matter to Philosophy and the Sciences?: Selected Essays PDF
Preview Why Does History Matter to Philosophy and the Sciences?: Selected Essays
Lorenz Krüger Why Does History Matter to Philosophy and the Sciences? W DE G Quellen und Studien zur Philosophie Herausgegeben von Jürgen Mittelstraß, Dominik Perler, Wolfgang Wieland Band 66 Walter de Gruyter · Berlin · New York Why Does History Matter to Philosophy and the Sciences? Selected Essays by Lorenz Krüger Edited by Thomas Sturm, Wolfgang Carl, and Lorraine Daston Walter de Gruyter · Berlin · New York © Printed on acid-free paper which falls within the guidelines of the ANSI to ensure permanence and durability. ISBN 3-11-018042-1 Bibliographic information published by Die Deutsche Bibliothek Die Deutsche Bibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie; detailed bibliographic data is available in the Internet at <http://dnb.ddb.de>. © Copyright 2005 by Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co. KG, D-10785 Berlin All rights reserved, including those of translation into foreign languages. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Cover design: Christopher Schneider, Berlin. Printed in Germany Contents Why Does History Matter to Philosophy and the Sciences? Editors' Introduction 1 I Three Philosophical Classics 1 Did Kant Aim to Prove the Completeness of His Table of Judgments? (1968) 21 2 Was John Locke an Empiricist? (1970) 45 3 Probability in Leibniz (1981) 63 II Scientific Theories .Their Relations and Their Development 1 Intertheoretic Relations as a Tool for the Rational Reconstruction of Scientific Development (1980) 79 2 Reduction as a Problem: Some Remarks on the History of Statistical Mechanics from a Philosophical Point of View (1980) .... 93 3 Unity of Science and Cultural Pluralism (1981) 119 III Indeterminism in Explanation and Causation 1 Are Statistical Explanations Possible? (1976) 137 2 Causality and Freedom (1992) 155 IV Realism and Its Histories 1 Matter For Us and in Itself-What Are Primary Properties? (1989) ... 169 2 Does Progress in Science Lead to Truth? (1991) 187 3 Has the Correspondence Theory of Truth Been Refuted? From Gottlob Frege to Donald Davidson (1995) 201 V Philosophy, the Sciences, and Their History 1 Does a Science Need Knowledge of Its History? (1978) 221 2 Why Do We Study the History of Philosophy? (1984) 231 3 How Philosophy and Science Came to Differ (1988) 255 List of Publications by Lorenz Krüger 269 Why Does History Matter to Philosophy and the Sciences? Editors' Introduction Thomas Sturm, Wolfgang Carl and Lorraine Daston The title of this volume is a variation of three papers by Lorenz Krüger (1932- 1994) chosen for the present selection, namely "Does a Science Need Know- ledge of Its History?" and "Why Do We Study the History of Philosophy?" and "How Philosophy and Science Came to Differ", all brought together in the last section of the present volume. These essays may be considered the cornerstone of this volume, while the essays in the four other sections provide illuminating examples of his distinctive way of dealing with philosophical problems. What Krüger argues and frequently exemplifies in the papers collected for this edition is a complex and challenging view of the relation between philoso- phy, the sciences, and their history. As is well known, there are widely held assumptions according to which history of philosophy and current philosophy should be connected, or that philosophy and history of science should not be estranged from one another, and, last but not least, that philosophy and the sci- ences may overcome their separation. There are good reasons for each of these views. But hardly anyone has thought about whether or not they should be con- nected. The first assumption concerns the relation between philosophy and its his- tory. Today philosophical discussions are often linked to the history of philoso- phy. Even among those philosophers who understand their own discipline sys- tematically, many recognize the importance of the history of their discipline. One oft-heard argument in favor of history is that students can learn how to philosophize from the classical arguments to be found in the writings of Aris- totle, Locke or Kant. Moreover, it is frequently maintained that current philoso- phical debates concerning, say, knowledge, morality or science can be improved by taking into account the arguments of outstanding philosophers of the past. Even if we need not rest content with the positions of these "older contemporar- ies", we are well advised to consider them, lest we repeat their mistakes. The second view is that the philosophy of science must be connected to the history of science, a view reinforced by the influence of Thomas Kuhn's semi- nal study The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (1962/1970). The philosophy 2 Why Does History Matter to Philosophy and the Sciences? of science, which conceives of the sciences as historical entities, has developed into a special subdiscipline of philosophy; this historical understanding shapes how philosophical questions about science are frequently treated nowadays. An investigation of the nature and presuppositions of scientific knowledge, or the dynamics of scientific research, cannot ignore past scientific practices. Although philosophers of science need not accept the findings of the history of science without qualification, they certainly must come to terms with how science has developed through the centuries. Thirdly, equally widespread and plausible is the claim that philosophy should be practiced in close contact to the sciences. This demand takes different forms as well. Some, following Willard Van Orman Quine, claim that it is mis- guided to think philosophy is an enterprise that differs substantially from the empirical sciences. In more moderate versions, it is claimed that philosophy requires discussion with physicists, mathematicians, cognitive scientists, economists, and practitioners of other disciplines in order to develop intellectu- ally respectable answers even to its own questions. It has been sometimes ar- gued, and with some justification, that philosophical claims must be vetted for consistency with well-established scientific findings. Yet the reverse seems less compelling: it would be ridiculous to think philosophers of science could evalu- ate, direct or improve scientific research from the notorious armchair. Philoso- phers need not accept the current practice of science without demur, but phi- losophical counsel should be developed in close and informed exchange with current practitioners in the sciences. Clearly, each of these demands makes sense only against the background of a de facto dissociation of philosophy and the sciences over the course of history - a fact that itself needs explanation and evaluation, if one wishes to be clear how to evaluate these demands. The three views about the relations between philosophy, history, and the sci- ences can be found in slightly different versions, but all enjoy widespread as- sent. Moreover, each of them has produced many instances of fruitful philoso- phical inquiry. Nonetheless, it has proved difficult to integrate them. To some extent, this is due to the fact that the guiding claims have been developed in different philosophical contexts. While they have attained the status of accepted wisdom, different specialties within philosophy have in practice always concen- trated upon only one or the other of these claims. Moreover, philosophical stud- ies that would do justice to all three desiderata at once would require thorough and daunting expertise in a number of different domains. Finally, linking them in order to pursue a specific type of philosophizing would require more basic reflections about these beliefs as well. After all, how could one develop studies relevant to current questions of philosophy, informed by an understanding of the history of philosophy and also by the history of the sciences and their relations to the relevant parts of the history of philosophy? It would be easy to lose one's way among such different agendas and audiences.
The list of books you might like
