A Critical Examination of the Philosophy of Charles S. Peirce: a Defence of the Claim That His Pragmatism Is Founded on His Theory of Categories

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

A Critical Examination of the Philosophy of Charles S. Peirce: a Defence of the Claim That His Pragmatism Is Founded on His Theory of Categories The University of Notre Dame Australia ResearchOnline@ND Theses 2002 A Critical Examination of the Philosophy of Charles S. Peirce: A Defence of the Claim that his Pragmatism is Founded on his Theory of Categories Siosifa Ika University of Notre Dame Australia Follow this and additional works at: https://researchonline.nd.edu.au/theses Part of the Philosophy Commons COMMONWEALTH OF AUSTRALIA Copyright Regulations 1969 WARNING The material in this communication may be subject to copyright under the Act. Any further copying or communication of this material by you may be the subject of copyright protection under the Act. Do not remove this notice. Publication Details Ika, S. (2002). A Critical Examination of the Philosophy of Charles S. Peirce: A Defence of the Claim that his Pragmatism is Founded on his Theory of Categories (Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)). University of Notre Dame Australia. https://researchonline.nd.edu.au/ theses/16 This dissertation/thesis is brought to you by ResearchOnline@ND. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses by an authorized administrator of ResearchOnline@ND. For more information, please contact [email protected]. A CRITICAL EXAMINATION OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF CHARLES S. PEIRCE A Defence of the Claim that his Pragmatism is Founded on his Theory of Categories Siosifa Ika A thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy of the University of Notre Dame Australia College of Theology October, 2002. Table of Contents: Abstract vi Declaration vii Acknowledgements viii Abbreviations ix Dedication x INTRODUCTION 1 PART I: PEIRCE’S THEORY OF CATEGORIES 1. PEIRCE’S THEORY OF CATEGORIES AND ITS UNIQUENESS 11 1.1 Some Preliminary Remarks 12 1.1.1 Reasons for Beginning with Peirce’s Theory of Categories 12 1.1.2 What is Meant by a ‘Theory of Categories’? 13 1.2 ‘On a New List of Categories’: An Introduction to Peirce’s Theory of Categories 14 1.2.1 The Aim of the ‘New List’ 14 1.2.2 The Method Employed in the ‘New List’ 15 1.2.3 The Categories of the ‘New List’ 17 1.2.3.1 Substance and Being: The Beginning and End of Conception 18 1.2.3.2 Quality, Relation, Representation: The Intermediate Conceptions 20 1.2.4 Numerical Description of the Categories 23 1.2.5 Types of Representations and Logic 24 1.3 Aristotle, Kant, and Peirce on Categories: A Brief Comparison and Contrast 28 1.3.1 Aristotle’s Categories 28 1.3.2 Kant’s Categories 31 1.4 Some Changes to the Categories of the ‘New List’ 33 1.4.1 From Five to Three Categories 33 1.4.2 The Impact of the Logic of Relations and Quantification Theory on Peirce’s Approach to Categories 37 1.4.2.1 Logic of Relations 38 1.4.2.2 Theory of Quantification 40 1.5 Theory of Categories and the Classification of the Sciences 42 1.5.1 Peirce’s Classification of the Sciences 43 1.5.2 Sciences of Discovery (or Theoretical Sciences) 44 1.5.2.1 Semiotic and Observation in Science of Discovery 46 1.5.3 Divisions of Philosophy 48 2 2. PEIRCE’S PHENOMENOLOGICAL INQUIRY INTO THE NATURE OF THE CATEGORIES 49 2.1 Peirce’s Conception of Phenomenology 50 2.1.1 Why does he call his approach ‘Phenomenology’? 50 2.1.2 The Aim and Scope of ‘Phenomenology’ 51 2.1.3 The Methods of Phenomenology 54 2.2 The Categories as Phenomenologically Described 55 2.2.1 The Category of ‘Firstness’ 56 2.2.2 The Category of ‘Secondness’ 58 2.2.3 The Category of ‘Thirdness’ 59 2.3 Phenomenology as Part of a System of the Sciences 60 2.3.1 An Argument for Peirce’s Phenomenology as Part of Philosophy 61 2.3.2 Phenomenology as Considered from the Point of View of Categories 65 2.3.3 The Importance of Peirce’s Phenomenology to his Philosophy 65 2.3.3.1 Philosophy as an “Observational” Science and a “Science of Discovery” 67 2.3.3.2 The Object of Discovery 68 PART II: PRAGMATISM AND THE THIRD GRADE OF CLARITY 3. THE ORIGIN, PURPOSE, AND PRESUPPOSITIONS OF PEIRCE’S PRAGMATISM 70 3.1 ‘Pragmatism’ as a Theory of Inquiry for Meaning Clarification 71 3.1.1 The Object of Reasoning and Guiding Principle 71 3.1.2 Doubt, Belief, and Inquiry 72 3.1.2.1 “Belief”: Its Impacts on Pragmatism 74 3.1.2.2 The “Misfortune” of “Sensible Effects” 75 3.2 Psychological Doubt and Its Limitation in Inquiry 79 3.2.1 Two Purposes of Inquiry 80 3.2.2 Methods of Fixing Belief 81 3.2.3 The Ideas of “Purpose” and “Method” Connected 83 3.3 Pragmatism and the Categories 84 3.3.1 The Categories as Constitutive Principles for Pragmatism 85 3.3.2 Categories and the Scientific Method 88 3.3.3 The Question of the Proof of Pragmatism 89 3.3.4 Pragmatism and the Principle of Abduction 90 3 4. THE PLACE OF REALISM IN PEIRCE’S PRAGMATISM 92 4.1 Peirce on Nominalism-Realism Controversy 93 4.1.1 Introduction 93 4.1.2 What Does ‘Realism’ Mean for Peirce? 93 4.1.3 From Nominalism to Realism: Accepting that External Reality Exists 95 4.2 Pragmatism within the Framework of Realism 96 4.2.1 One-Category Realism 96 4.2.1.1 The Early Formulation of Pragmatism 102 4.2.2 Two-Category Realism 104 4.2.3 Three-Category Realism 105 4.2.3.1 The Later Formulation of Pragmatism 107 4.3 Is Peirce’s Realism a Presupposition or Consequence of his Pragmatism? 108 4.3.1 The Specific Sense of Realism as a Consequence of Pragmatism 110 4.4 Conclusion 111 5. PRAGMATISM AND METAPHYSICS 113 5.1 Collingwood’s Notion of “Absolute Presupposition” 114 5.2 The Absolute Presupposition of Pragmatism 120 5.2.1 The ‘Community of Inquirers’ 121 5.2.2 The Common-sense Position of Pragmatism 122 5.3 Peirce’s Critique of the Positivist View of Metaphysics 124 5.3.1 “The Love of Life” 126 5.4 A Brief Account of Peirce’s Own View of Metaphysics 127 5.4.1 What is Metaphysics for Peirce? 128 5.4.2 Some Characteristic Features of the ‘Future’ Mode of Being 130 5.4.3 Metaphysics as an Observational Science 131 5.4.4 ‘Continuity’ and the Metaphysics of the ‘Future’ 133 5.5 The Metaphysical Side of Pragmatism 136 5.5.1 The Metaphysical Problem as Pragmatically Formulated 137 5.5.2 Does Pragmatism Make Any Metaphysical Assertion? 138 4 PART III: PEIRCE’S THEORY OF SIGNS 6. THE NATURE AND SCOPE OF THEORY OF SIGNS 141 6.1 The Science of Semiotic 142 6.1.1 Logic Considered as Semiotic 144 6.1.1.1 The Division of Semiotic 145 6.1.2 Semiotic and the Sciences 146 6.2 The Components and Relationships of Signs as Paradigmatic for Truth and Meaning 148 6.2.1 Representamen 148 6.2.2 The Object of a Sign 149 6.2.3 Interpretant 150 6.3 Semiotic as the Basis for Inquiry 152 6.3.1 Observation in Inquiry 152 6.3.2 The Metaphysical Neutrality of Semiotic 153 6.3.3 The Question of the Relation between Objectivity and Realism in Peirce 154 7. THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PEIRCE’S CATEGORIES, HIS THEORY OF SIGNS, AND HIS PRAGMATISM 157 7.1 The Categories and Signs as Understood within the Context of Inquiry 159 7.1.1 The Reasons for Adopting ‘Inquiry’ as the Framework for Considering the Relation between the ‘Categories’ and ‘Signs’ 159 7.1.2 The Categories as Pertinent to Logic 160 7.2 The Distinction between the Categories and Signs 161 7.2.1 The Distinction between ‘Beings of Reason’ and ‘Real Beings’ 161 7.2.2 The Distinction between Categories and Signs as both Relative and Absolute 162 7.2.3 Clarifying the Question of ‘Extra-Semiotic Entities’ 164 7.3 A Consideration of the Relation between Logic and Metaphysics within the Framework of Inquiry 165 7.3.1 Some General Features of Peirce’s View on the Relation between Logic and Metaphysics 165 7.3.2 Some Fundamental Ideas of Intentional Logic 166 7.3.3 The ‘Sign’ is not a Category 167 CONCLUSION 168 Bibliography 177 5 Abstract This thesis explores the relation in Peirce’s philosophy between his theory of categories and his pragmatism. My most central claim is that the possibility and validity of metaphysics as a philosophical science depend on the appropriateness of its method. I argue that an appropriate method for metaphysics is possible, and that in Peirce’s pragmatism as founded on his theory of categories we find such a method. In developing this thesis I seek to demonstrate four key propositions: 1. Peirce’s ‘pragmatism’ is fundamentally a form of metaphysical and epistemological realism and in this respect differs from logical positivism and other types of pragmatism that are overtly anti-metaphysical and skeptical about the possibility of our knowledge of real generals. 2. Peirce’s ‘theory of categories’ is the key to understanding his philosophy and demonstrates the extent to which he embraces a form of dialectical realism that bears striking resemblance to certain forms of scholastic metaphysics. 3. Peirce’s ‘semiotic’ or theory of signs can only be properly understood if we take full account of his theory of categories and the form of metaphysical and epistemological realism it implies. 4. Peirce’s account of semiotic is based on an irreducible trichotomy that he holds to exist between the categories, and which is reflected in the triadic relationship between Sign, Sign User and Thing Signified.
Recommended publications
  • And Peirce's Synechism
    Elective Metaphysical Affi nities: Emerson’s “Natural History of Intellect” and Peirce’s Synechism Afi nidades Eletivas Metafísicas: A “História Natural do Intelecto” de Emerson e o Sinequismo de Peirce David A. Dilworth Philosophy Department State University of New York at Stony Brook – USA [email protected] Abstract: The paper suggests that Peirce’s late-phase metaphysical system af- termathed Emerson’s basic philosophical ideas elaborated over four decades before him. Peirce, with characteristic brilliance, transformed Emerson’s own luminous ideas into his categorial elaborations of abduction, cosmogonic synechism, universal semiosis, and the like. To illustrate this process of transformation, the paper provides a running synopsis of Emerson’s last signifi cant writing, “The Natural History of Intellect” (1870), which was ori- ginally part of a team-taught lecture series at Harvard that Emerson shared with six others, one of whom was the young C. S. Peirce. The synopsis evidences that virtually all of Peirce’s major metaphysical tenets had their precedent in Emerson. Among other places, Peirce acknowledged Emerson’s infl uence (together with that of Schelling) in his 1892 essay, “The Law of Mind.” Even before that, he referenced Emerson’s poem “The Sphinx” in his “A Guess at the Riddle” of 1887-88, the turning-point in Peirce’s career towarde metaphysical speculation. Peirce’s conscious awareness of Emerson’s philososphy and poetry traces back to many sources (including Emerson’s long friendship with his father, Benjamin Peirce). The elective affi nity be- tween his and Emerson’s views allows us to appreciate that the two authors forged a central strain of idealistic-cum-realistic metaphysical thinking that framed the later Pragmatisms of James and Dewey, among others.
    [Show full text]
  • Nominalism, Trivialism, Logicism
    Nominalism, Trivialism, Logicism Agustín Rayo∗ May 1, 2014 This paper is an effort to extract some of the main theses in the philosophy of mathematics from my book, The Construction of Logical Space. I show that there are important limits to the availability of nominalistic paraphrase-functions for mathematical languages, and sug- gest a way around the problem by developing a method for specifying nominalistic contents without corresponding nominalistic paraphrases. Although much of the material in this paper is drawn from the book—and from an earlier paper (Rayo 2008)—I hope the present discussion will earn its keep by motivating the ideas in a new way, and by suggesting further applications. 1 Nominalism Mathematical Nominalism is the view that there are no mathematical objets. A standard problem for nominalists is that it is not obvious that they can explain what the point of a mathematical assertion would be. For it is natural to think that mathematical sentences like ‘the number of the dinosaurs is zero’ or ‘1 + 1 = 2’ can only be true if mathematical objects exist. But if this is right, the nominalist is committed to the view that such sentences are untrue. And if the sentences are untrue, it not immediately obvious why they would be worth asserting. ∗For their many helpful comments, I am indebted to Vann McGee, Kevin Richardson, Bernhard Salow and two anonymous referees for Philosophia Mathematica. I would also like to thank audiences at Smith College, the Università Vita-Salute San Raffaele, and MIT’s Logic, Langauge, Metaphysics and Mind Reading Group. Most of all, I would like to thank Steve Yablo.
    [Show full text]
  • Biography Paper – Georg Cantor
    Mike Garkie Math 4010 – History of Math UCD Denver 4/1/08 Biography Paper – Georg Cantor Few mathematicians are house-hold names; perhaps only Newton and Euclid would qualify. But there is a second tier of mathematicians, those whose names might not be familiar, but whose discoveries are part of everyday math. Examples here are Napier with logarithms, Cauchy with limits and Georg Cantor (1845 – 1918) with sets. In fact, those who superficially familier with Georg Cantor probably have two impressions of the man: First, as a consequence of thinking about sets, Cantor developed a theory of the actual infinite. And second, that Cantor was a troubled genius, crippled by Freudian conflict and mental illness. The first impression is fundamentally true. Cantor almost single-handedly overturned the Aristotle’s concept of the potential infinite by developing the concept of transfinite numbers. And, even though Bolzano and Frege made significant contributions, “Set theory … is the creation of one person, Georg Cantor.” [4] The second impression is mostly false. Cantor certainly did suffer from mental illness later in his life, but the other emotional baggage assigned to him is mostly due his early biographers, particularly the infamous E.T. Bell in Men Of Mathematics [7]. In the racially charged atmosphere of 1930’s Europe, the sensational story mathematician who turned the idea of infinity on its head and went crazy in the process, probably make for good reading. The drama of the controversy over Cantor’s ideas only added spice. 1 Fortunately, modern scholars have corrected the errors and biases in older biographies.
    [Show full text]
  • European Journal of Pragmatism and American Philosophy, VIII-2 | 2016 “I Have to Confess I Cannot Read History So,” 2
    European Journal of Pragmatism and American Philosophy VIII-2 | 2016 Pragmatism and the Writing of History “I Have To Confess I Cannot Read History So,” On the Origins and Development of Peirce’s Philosophy of History Alessandro Topa Electronic version URL: http://journals.openedition.org/ejpap/628 DOI: 10.4000/ejpap.628 ISSN: 2036-4091 Publisher Associazione Pragma Electronic reference Alessandro Topa, « “I Have To Confess I Cannot Read History So,” », European Journal of Pragmatism and American Philosophy [Online], VIII-2 | 2016, Online since 16 January 2017, connection on 19 April 2019. URL : http://journals.openedition.org/ejpap/628 ; DOI : 10.4000/ejpap.628 This text was automatically generated on 19 April 2019. Author retains copyright and grants the European Journal of Pragmatism and American Philosophy right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution- NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License. “I Have To Confess I Cannot Read History So,” 1 “I Have To Confess I Cannot Read History So,” On the Origins and Development of Peirce’s Philosophy of History Alessandro Topa AUTHOR'S NOTE I am indebted to the two anonymous referees, the editors and Emily Smith for suggestions that improved this paper. “The science of knowledge is to be a pragmatic history of the human mind.” Fichte, 1794 “Nature’s highest goal, to become wholly an object to herself, is achieved only through the last and highest order of reflection, which is none other than man; or, more generally, it is what we call reason, whereby nature first completely returns into herself, and by which it becomes apparent that nature is identical from the first with what we recognize in ourselves as the intelligent and the conscious.” Schelling, 1800 “Our physical science, whatever extravagant historicists may say, seems to have sprung up uncaused except by man’s intelligence and nature’s intelligibility, which never could before be operative because it was not studied minutely.
    [Show full text]
  • The Ten Lenses of Philosophical Inquiry Philosophical Inquiry Research Project1
    The Ten Lenses of Philosophical Inquiry Philosophical Inquiry Research Project1 The real voyage of discovery consists not in seeking new landscapes, but in having new eyes. – Marcel Proust A huge part of Philosophical Inquiry is learning how to see the world with new eyes. To accomplish this goal, you will be introduced to the “ten lenses of philosophical inquiry.” The ten lenses of philosophical inquiry are tools to help us critically engage with, and analyze ourselves, and the world around us. Like a pair of glasses, the ten lenses help to change our perception and give us the power to re-examine our reality. In this philosophical inquiry research project you will get introduced to each of the ten lenses so that you become comfortable using the lenses both inside and out of our class. You will also learn more about a philosopher, their philosophy and the lens of philosophical inquiry that they are most clearly connected to. Focus Question What are the ten lenses of philosophical inquiry, and what are some examples of how they are connected to the philosophies of different philosopher’s throughout history? Philosophical Inquiry Research Process 1) QUESTION - Develop the philosophical questions that you will use to drive your inquiry. 2) PLAN – Determine the types of sources that you will need to answer your questions. 3) GATHER EVIDENCE – Gather the information (textual, visual, quantitative, etc.) you need to explore and answer your questions. 4) ANALYZE – Analyze the answers to your questions, making sure to keep in mind the larger focus question guiding this inquiry. 5) COMMUNICATE CONCLUSIONS – Use evidence and reasons to write an organized (logically sequenced) explanation to the inquiry’s topic/focus question.
    [Show full text]
  • A Diagrammatic Approach to Peirce's Classifications of Signs
    A diagrammatic approach to Peirce’s classifications of signs1 Priscila Farias Graduate Program in Design (SENAC-SP & UFPE) [email protected] João Queiroz Graduate Studies Program on History, Philosophy, and Science Teaching (UFBA/UEFS) Dept. of Computer Engineering and Industrial Automation (DCA/FEEC/UNICAMP) [email protected] © This paper is not for reproduction without permission of the author(s). ABSTRACT Starting from an analysis of two diagrams for 10 classes of signs designed by Peirce in 1903 and 1908 (CP 2.264 and 8.376), this paper sets forth the basis for a diagrammatic understanding of all kinds of classifications based on his triadic model of a sign. Our main argument is that it is possible to observe a common pattern in the arrangement of Peirce’s diagrams of 3-trichotomic classes, and that this pattern should be extended for the design of diagrams for any n-trichotomic classification of signs. Once this is done, it is possible to diagrammatically compare the conflicting claims done by Peircean scholars re- garding the divisions of signs into 28, and specially into 66 classes. We believe that the most important aspect of this research is the proposal of a consolidated tool for the analysis of any kind of sign structure within the context of Peirce’s classifications of signs. Keywords: Peircean semiotics, classifications of signs, diagrammatic reasoning. 1. PEIRCE’S DIAGRAMS FOR 10 CLASSES OF SIGNS In a draft of a letter to Lady Welby composed by the end of December 1908 (dated 24-28 December, L463:132-146, CP 8.342-76, EP2:483-491; we will be referring to this diagram 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Postmodernism: Theorising Fragmentation and Uncertainty
    Chapter contents Friedrich Nietzsche 213 Bauman as postmodernist 234 `Gloss' and `disclaimers' in the What is a modern person? 237 writings of Jean-FrancËois The modern identity 238 Lyotard 217 Bauman: the critique of life Lyotard, The DiffeÂrend: in the postmodern condition 243 Phrases in Dispute (1988) 219 Deleuze and Guattari 244 Critique of Lyotard 221 Jean Baudrillard (1929± Richard Rorty 223 present) 259 Zygmunt Bauman 226 Gianni Vattimo (1936±present) 262 The creation of a Critiques of postmodernism 265 postmodernist 229 In conclusion: living in the Bauman as modernist 230 postmodern condition 270 Postmodernism: Theorising Fragmentation 6 and Uncertainty By the end of this chapter you should: · have a critical understanding of · be familiar with the key the notions of postmodernism and postmodern writers: Lyotard, postmodernity; Bauman, Baudrillard, Vattimo, · appreciate the signi®cance of Deleuze and Guattari, Rorty, and Nietzsche to postmodern Fish; theorising; · be aware of some of the central critiques of postmodernism: Sokal, Habermas, Giddens, Philo, Kellner. Friedrich Nietzsche riedrich Nietzsche (1844±1900) invented many of the central ideas and concepts which postmodern- F ism raises about the foundations of society. In particular, Nietzsche's anti-foundationalist ideas, built upon the assumption that `God is dead', together with his refusal to privilege his own position, have in¯uenced most of the postmodern writers that we shall review in this chapter. According to Anthony Giddens: `Nietzsche offers a refuge for those who have lost their modernist illusions without relapsing into complete cynicism or apathy' (Giddens, 1995: 261). Nietzsche attempted to undermine the foundations of truth, morality, science, identity and religion.
    [Show full text]
  • A Prologue to Charles Sanders Peirce's Theory of Signs
    In Lieu of Saussure: A Prologue to Charles Sanders Peirce’s Theory of Signs E. San Juan, Jr. Language is as old as consciousness, language is practical consciousness that exists also for other men, and for that reason alone it really exists for me personally as well; language, like consciousness, only arises from the need, the necessity, of intercourse with other men. – Karl Marx, The German Ideology (1845-46) General principles are really operative in nature. Words [such as Patrick Henry’s on liberty] then do produce physical effects. It is madness to deny it. The very denial of it involves a belief in it. – C.S. Peirce, Harvard Lectures on Pragmatism (1903) The era of Saussure is dying, the epoch of Peirce is just struggling to be born. Although pragmatism has been experiencing a renaissance in philosophy in general in the last few decades, Charles Sanders Peirce, the “inventor” of this anti-Cartesian, scientific- realist method of clarifying meaning, still remains unacknowledged as a seminal genius, a polymath master-thinker. William James’s vulgarized version has overshadowed Peirce’s highly original theory of “pragmaticism” grounded on a singular conception of semiotics. Now recognized as more comprehensive and heuristically fertile than Saussure’s binary semiology (the foundation of post-structuralist textualisms) which Cold War politics endorsed and popularized, Peirce’s “semeiotics” (his preferred rubric) is bound to exert a profound revolutionary influence. Peirce’s triadic sign-theory operates within a critical- realist framework opposed to nominalism and relativist nihilism (Liszka 1996). I endeavor to outline here a general schema of Peirce’s semeiotics and initiate a hypothetical frame for interpreting Michael Ondaatje’s Anil’s’ Ghost, an exploratory or Copyright © 2012 by E.
    [Show full text]
  • Quantification of Damages , in 3 ISSUES in COMPETITION LAW and POLICY 2331 (ABA Section of Antitrust Law 2008)
    Theon van Dijk & Frank Verboven, Quantification of Damages , in 3 ISSUES IN COMPETITION LAW AND POLICY 2331 (ABA Section of Antitrust Law 2008) Chapter 93 _________________________ QUANTIFICATION OF DAMAGES Theon van Dijk and Frank Verboven * This chapter provides a general economic framework for quantifying damages or lost profits in price-fixing cases. We begin with a conceptual framework that explicitly distinguishes between the direct cost effect of a price overcharge and the subsequent indirect pass-on and output effects of the overcharge. We then discuss alternative methods to quantify these various components of damages, ranging from largely empirical approaches to more theory-based approaches. Finally, we discuss the law and economics of price-fixing damages in the United States and Europe, with the focus being the legal treatment of the various components of price-fixing damages, as well as the legal standing of the various groups harmed by collusion. 1. Introduction Economic damages can be caused by various types of competition law violations, such as price-fixing or market-dividing agreements, exclusionary practices, or predatory pricing by a dominant firm. Depending on the violation, there are different parties that may suffer damages, including customers (direct purchasers and possibly indirect purchasers located downstream in the distribution chain), suppliers, and competitors. Even though the parties damaged and the amount of the damage may be clear from an economic perspective, in the end it is the legal framework within a jurisdiction that determines which violations can lead to compensation, which parties have standing to sue for damages, and the burden and standard of proof that must be met by plaintiffs and defendants.
    [Show full text]
  • A Feminist Epistemological Framework: Preventing Knowledge Distortions in Scientific Inquiry
    Claremont Colleges Scholarship @ Claremont Scripps Senior Theses Scripps Student Scholarship 2019 A Feminist Epistemological Framework: Preventing Knowledge Distortions in Scientific Inquiry Karina Bucciarelli Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.claremont.edu/scripps_theses Part of the Epistemology Commons, Feminist Philosophy Commons, and the Philosophy of Science Commons Recommended Citation Bucciarelli, Karina, "A Feminist Epistemological Framework: Preventing Knowledge Distortions in Scientific Inquiry" (2019). Scripps Senior Theses. 1365. https://scholarship.claremont.edu/scripps_theses/1365 This Open Access Senior Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Scripps Student Scholarship at Scholarship @ Claremont. It has been accepted for inclusion in Scripps Senior Theses by an authorized administrator of Scholarship @ Claremont. For more information, please contact [email protected]. A FEMINIST EPISTEMOLOGICAL FRAMEWORK: PREVENTING KNOWLEDGE DISTORTIONS IN SCIENTIFIC INQUIRY by KARINA MARTINS BUCCIARELLI SUBMITTED TO SCRIPPS COLLEGE IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE DEGREE OF BACHELOR OF ARTS PROFESSOR SUSAN CASTAGNETTO PROFESSOR RIMA BASU APRIL 26, 2019 Bucciarelli 2 Acknowledgements First off, I would like to thank my wonderful family for supporting me every step of the way. Mamãe e Papai, obrigada pelo amor e carinho, mil telefonemas, conversas e risadas. Obrigada por não só proporcionar essa educação incrível, mas também me dar um exemplo de como viver. Rafa, thanks for the jokes, the editing help and the spontaneous phone calls. Bela, thank you for the endless time you give to me, for your patience and for your support (even through WhatsApp audios). To my dear friends, thank you for the late study nights, the wild dance parties, the laughs and the endless support.
    [Show full text]
  • Defining Data Science by a Data-Driven Quantification of the Community
    machine learning & knowledge extraction Article Defining Data Science by a Data-Driven Quantification of the Community Frank Emmert-Streib 1,2,* and Matthias Dehmer 3,4,5 1 Predictive Medicine and Data Analytics Lab, Department of Signal Processing, Tampere University of Technology, FI-33101 Tampere, Finland 2 Institute of Biosciences and Medical Technology, FI-33101 Tampere, Finland 3 Institute for Intelligent Production, Faculty for Management, University of Applied Sciences Upper Austria, Steyr Campus, A-4400 Steyr, Austria; [email protected] 4 Department of Mechatronics and Biomedical Computer Science, UMIT, A-6060 Hall in Tyrol, Austria 5 College of Computer and Control Engineering, Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, China * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +358-50-301-5353 Received: 4 December 2018; Accepted: 17 December 2018; Published: 19 December 2018 Abstract: Data science is a new academic field that has received much attention in recent years. One reason for this is that our increasingly digitalized society generates more and more data in all areas of our lives and science and we are desperately seeking for solutions to deal with this problem. In this paper, we investigate the academic roots of data science. We are using data of scientists and their citations from Google Scholar, who have an interest in data science, to perform a quantitative analysis of the data science community. Furthermore, for decomposing the data science community into its major defining factors corresponding to the most important research fields, we introduce a statistical regression model that is fully automatic and robust with respect to a subsampling of the data.
    [Show full text]
  • Review: Marcello Barbieri (Ed) (2007) Introduction to Biosemiotics. the New Biological Synthesis
    tripleC 5(3): 104-109, 2007 ISSN 1726-670X http://tripleC.uti.at Review: Marcello Barbieri (Ed) (2007) Introduction to Biosemiotics. The new biological synthesis. Dordrecht: Springer Günther Witzany telos – Philosophische Praxis Vogelsangstr. 18c A-5111-Buermoos/Salzburg Austria E-mail: [email protected] 1 Thematic background without utterances we act as non-uttering indi- viduals being dependent on the discourse de- Maybe it is no chance that the discovery of the rived meaning processes of a linguistic (e.g. sci- genetic code occurred during the hot phase of entific) community. philosophy of science discourse about the role of This position marks the primary difference to language in generating models of scientific ex- the subject of knowledge of Kantian knowledge planation. The code-metaphor was introduced theories wherein one subject alone in principle parallel to other linguistic terms to denote lan- could be able to generate sentences in which it guage like features of the nucleic acid sequence generates knowledge. This abstractive fallacy molecules such as “code without commas” was ruled out in the early 50s of the last century (Francis Crick). At the same time the 30 years of being replaced by the “community of investiga- trying to establish an exact scientific language to tors” (Peirce) represented by the scientific com- delimit objective sentences from non-objective munity in which every single scientist is able the ones derived one of his peaks in the linguistic place his utterance looking for being integrated turn. in the discourse community in which his utter- ances will be proven whether they are good ar- 1.1 Changing subjects of knowledge guments or not.
    [Show full text]