General Statements About the Good, Ethics of Science and Transcendentalism
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.47850/RL.2023.4.1.52-61Keywords:
statements about the good, transcendentalism, ethics of science, Wittgenstein, MertonAbstract
The purpose of this research is to probe the hypothesis about the transcendental nature of the ethics of science as a kind of knowledge. The author makes the test during the analysis of Wittgenstein’s statements about ethics concerning the main points of the Mertonian theory of the ethos of science. The author implements a method of comparative analysis, which allows clarifying the statements regarding the transcendental understanding of ethics. The research discloses the prospects for harmonizing transcendental understanding with the interpretation of scientific ethics from the perspective of the theory of the ethos of science. As a result, the research shows the connection of the ethics of science with the issues of social psychology which are poorly connected with logical principles of rational thinking. The statements in the theory of the ethos of science depend on the difficulties by the logical attitude. The transcendental nature of scientific ethics makes it difficult to understand the meaning of norms and values within the framework of the ethics of science, but does not deprive them of their importance in demonstrating rules of behavior.
References
Гончарко, О. Ю., Гончарко, Д. Н. (2016). Этика и/или логика в «Трактате» Л. Витгенштейна? Вестник Русской христианской гуманитарной академии. Т. 17. № 3. С. 107 114.
Goncharko, O. Yu., Goncharko, D. N. (2016). Ethics and/or logics in “Tractatus” of L. Wittgenstein? Review the Russian Christian Academy for the Humanities. Vol. 17. no. 3. pp. 107-114 (in Russ.)
Суровцев, В. А., Родин, К. А. (2020). «Заметки о цвете» Людвига Витгенштейна: от логики цвета – к социологии цвета. Праксема. Проблемы визуальной семиотики. Т. 24. № 2. С. 25-38. DOI: https://doi.org/10.23951/2312-7899-2020-2-25-38
Surovtsev, V. A., Rodin, K. A. (2020). Wittgenstein’s “Remarks on colour”: from colour logic to social studies of colour. Praxema. Vol. 24. no. 2. pp. 25-38 DOI: https://doi.org/10.23951/2312-7899-2020-2-25-38 (in Russ.)
Christensen, A.-M. (2004). Wittgenstein and ethical norms: The question of ineffability visited and revisited. Florianópolis. Vol. 3. no. 2. pp. 121-134.
Kulikov, S. B. (2020). Scientific Ethos and Foundations of Conscious Activity. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science. Vol. 54. no. 1. pp. 158-178. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12124-019-09483-6
Merton, R. K. (1973). The Sociology of Science. Theoretical and Empirical Investigations. Chicago and London. The University of Chicago Press. 636 p.
Moore, G. E. (1922). Principia Ethica. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press. 277 p.
Richardson, A. (2004). Robert K. Merton and Philosophy of Science. Social Studies of Science. Vol. 34. no. 6. pp. 855-858. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0306312704042086
Wittgenstein, L. (1965). I: A Lecture on Ethics. The Philosophical Review. Vol. 74. no. 1. pp. 3 12. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/2183526
Wittgenstein, L. (1922). Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus. London. Routledge & Kegan Paul. 189 p.
Wittgenstein, L. (2001). Wittgenstein’s Lectures, Cambridge, 1932-35: From the Notes of Alice Ambrose and Margaret Macdonald. Ambrose, A. (ed.). New York. Prometheus Books. 225 p.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
https://oc.philosophy.nsc.ru/remote.php/webdav/%D0%94%D0%BE%D0%B3%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%BE%D1%80%20%D1%81%20%D0%B0%D0%B2%D1%82%D0%BE%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%BC%20RL-%D0%BF%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%B2.doc