Epistemology & Philosophy of Science

The problem of time is not an entirely physical problem. Physics itself does not contain a “time theory". That is particularly true in the sense that physics has not made any direct attempts to find the natural-science definition of the notion of time. Nevertheless, the concept of time emerges in science one way or another and still requires an explanation. Time fulfills an important role in the physics of XX and XXI centuries, though often a hidden one. Such a statement could be applied to both theories of macrocosm and microcosm. In the theory of relativity, time has been established as a secondary feature, a derivative of velocity and mass. However, it exists (although, as an illusion) and yet evokes the need of its philosophical interpretation. In quantum field theory time also (though implicitly) occurs according to the interpretation of the experiment results - for example, “where the particle was before its observation". Such “before"-cases indicate the very presence of time (more precisely, the observer's perception of its presence). Further theories, which have been the attempts to solve the problem of incompatibility of general relativity theory and quantum mechanics, such as the theory of loop quantum gravity, superstring theory, Shape Dynamics and others, also mention the concept of time. Time fulfills there a definite role and again evokes the question of its explanation in the frameworks of these theories. Most importantly, to find an exact meaning of this “time" term used here. This article deals with the problem of time in the context of several theories of modern physics. In particular, it attempts to give a definition of the term of time in relation to the philosophy of physics (physics itself does not characterize it). Such a task formulation has its relevance and novelty due to the facts that the discourse on the nature of time is still stipulated by Zeno's paradoxes, and the philosophy of science uses the obsolete vocabulary while describing the term. However, evidence suggests that modern physics has developed the new rules, or to be more precise, has stated the new principles, which the philosophy of science can not take into consideration without changing its vocabulary (the last also involves the modernization of intellectual intuition).

The article examines the question whether the economic discipline can be regarded as a kind of natural science it strives to be, taking into consideration the interpretation of an economic model as a kind of a thought experiment and closer connection between thought experiment and experimentation. The authors turn to epistemological analysis of thought experiments both in natural sciences and in economics and consider the historical background of this research tool and its relations with the experimentation practice. The study shows that the use of thought experiments in the economic theory and in natural sciences are fundamentally different. In natural science the thought experiment has never been detached from the material experimentation. On contrary, in economics it is used as an isolated procedure. However, isolated thought experiment is not a full-fledged research tool for studying the reality, as in that case it will affect some troubles with realism and practical efficiency of the research results. Rather, it constitutes the instrument for structuring or «mapping» the field of inquiry and can give results with social-constructive capacities.

Author analyzes the phenomenon of commoditization of human body in the context of the scientific development. It is argued that since the start of the development of biotechnologies human body has become a very attractive object for economic «investments» in the majority of developed countries. Author considers some anthropological foundations of the body commodification problem and some classifications of the relationships between individuals, science and society. The following dimensions of these relationships are examined in the paper: 1) an opposition of the individual and science; 2) an altruistic dimension; 3) a compensatory dimension. The “oppositional" dimension describes science as an institute that is not focused on the benefits of a certain person through the in- strumentalization and commoditization of corporality but is aimed to find the solution to some common social problems. Within the second (altruistic) dimension the individual seeks to make a contribution to the development of science and has no objection against the use of his biomaterials. A shady side of the altruistic dimension is the so-called “false altruism": a person is encouraged to donate biomaterials without any information about some possible risks and dangers for his health as well as about commercial interest of the researchers. The compensatory dimension comes from the material or moral damage compensation to the individual or his relatives for the use of his/her body (cells, substances, body parts) for biotechnological purposes.

The article is devoted to the analysis of theoretical bases of G. Bateson's anthropology. The author focuses on the concept of pattern by tracing the origins of this concept in the Goethe's morphology, the Gestalt psychology, the Benedict's anthropology, the Cybernetics and the Communication theory. In the context of the Communication theory “pattern" appears as a synonym of the engineering term “redundancy" that makes possible to consider it as a necessary condition for anticipation of communication sequences and economy of description. In addition, the pattern (redundancy) as a information organization form stands as the main criterion for sig- nal/noise ratio distinction. According to Bateson, the “pattern" can also be seen as an approximate synonym of “meaning". Applying of this interpretation to Bateson's analysis of the culture makes possible a more rigorous view at the problems of anthropological observation and description. The analysis demonstrates the need for anthropological observation, detecting patterns of two levels: the first one is valid within cultural systems (basic ideas, values and symbols of culture), the other one is valid within the system «culture + the observer» (abstract models). Thus, recognition of the pattern of the first level belonging to the language of the observed culture makes possible the interpretation of cultural events and facts. The pattern of the second level is not recognized but it is constructed, in a language more abstract than both the language of the observed culture and the language of culture of the observer. It is an explanatory scheme, in which mapping the fragments of description.

Author considers cognitive assumptions of practical consciousness: some preconditions on which an interaction with the social and natural objects is based. Author follows the “constructivist" program in social theory in its classic version which is represented by social phenomenology and phenomenological sociology of knowledge (A. Schutz, P. Berger, T. Luckmann). Author analyzes some latent axioms and presuppositions, “idealizations" and mechanisms of everyday consciousness which constitute individual social experience at the level of micro-interactions with the objects and the “others". This analysis also refers to the intellectual heritage of classical theory of knowledge (epistemological ideas of I. Kant, E. Husserl). Author considers the status of the Other in the elementary systems of social interaction; discusses the necessity to assume the relative constancy and uniformity of the objective world elements including the existence of an integral self-identical “I" (actor's personality). The organized process of social experience uninterruptedly operated by cognitive schemes of practical consciousness is considered as one of the main conditions of reproduction of coordinated routines which support social order and institutional structures of the society.

The text continues the translation series of William Whewell's (1794-1866) book «The Philosophy of the Inductive Sciences, founded upon their history» (Book III The Philosophy of the Mechanical Sciences, Chapter VI On the Establishment of the Principles of Statics). The chapter devoted to the establishment of such concepts of statics and dynamics, as equilibrium, measure of statical forces, gravity, oblique forces, and the parallelogram of forces. Whewell substantiates the fundamental principles of mechanics by analogy with the axioms of geometry, but his justification of the necessity of mechanical laws is based on the idea of causality. Translated by A.L. Nikiforov, comments by I.T. Kasavin and T.D. Sokolova.

Review represents a new edition of the Moscow seminar on philosophy of mathematics works. The book deals with two interrelated problems: the problem of “the incomprehensible effectiveness" of mathematics and the problem of the ontological status of mathematical objects. The conditions of applicability of mathematical theories in the natural, social and human sciences. Ideas and themes proposed by the authors of articles have goal to reveal perspective analysis of the subject, which allows detect its previously implicit sides. This approach makes possible to put different questions related to the foundations of mathematics and provide an additional impetus to research in this area.

The new book by Professor David J. Stump explores and develops the theories of the a priori, which are rarely considered in contemporary epistemology and philosophy of science: the theories of pragmatic and functional a priori, proposed in the early XX century by Clarence Irving Lewis and Arthur Pap. The author begins with the analysis of «constitutive elements of science» and Henri Poincare's conventionalism. He consistently and historically examines the approaches towards the theories of the a priori within the philosophy of science in the XX-XXI centuries, and also develops his own original approach to a priori based on the philosophy of science.