The Themata in Scientific Construction: An Inquiry into Objectivity as a Necessity.
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.62876/lr.vi48.7704Keywords:
themata, metaphysical assumptions, objectivity, Vienna Circle, Karl PopperAbstract
The concept of themata, as developed by Gerald Holton, refers to fundamental principles, often implicit, that guide scientific theories and practices. This epistemological concept has gained significant importance in the history and philosophy of science. This article examines the themata within the context of debates on scientific objectivity, drawing on Holton's idea that themata serve as metaphysical assumptions underlying the construction of scientific knowledge, right from its nascent phase, without necessarily losing their influence throughout the process. The analysis focuses primarily, though not exclusively, on the treatment of scientific objectivity within the Vienna Circle and the debates between Karl Popper and certain members of this group regarding conceptions of scientific objectivity. The article sets out at the outset to demonstrate the relevance of studying Holton's themata in relation to the problem of objectivity, and to elucidate the perspective chosen to address this question.
Downloads
References
Andler, Daniel, Anne Fagot-Largeault, and Bertrand Saint-Sernin. Philosophie Des Sciences I. Coll. Folio/ Essais. (Paris: Gallimard, 2002).
Bachelard, Gaston. The Formation of the Scientific Mind: A Contribution to a Psychoanalysis of Objective Knowledge. Translated by Mary McAllester Jones. Clinamen Series on Philosophy of Science. (Manchester: Clinamen Press, 2002).
Barone, Francesco. ‘La Polémique Sur Les Énoncés Protocolaires Dans l’épistémologie Du Cercle de Vienne’. In Le Cercle de Vienne. Doctrines et Controverses, edited by Jan Sebestik and Antonia Soulez. (Paris: L’Harmattan, 2001).
Berthelot, Jean-Michel. L’Intelligence Du Social. (Paris: PUF, 1990).
Claveau, François. ‘Let’s Talk about Objectivity: Historical and Philosophical Contributions: Flavia Padovani, Alan Richardson and Jonathan Y. Tsou (Eds): Objectivity in Science: New Perspectives from Science and Technology Studies. Cham: Springer, 2015’. Metascience 25, no. 2 (2016): 297–300.
Daston, Lorraine, and Peter Galison. Objectivity. (New York: Zone Books, 2007).
Emboussi Nyano, Eugène. ‘Norwood Russell Hanson : L’épistémologie de La Forme’. In N. R. HANSON, Modèles de La Découverte. Une Enquête Sur Les Fondements Conceptuels de La Science, Traduction et Présentation Par Emboussi Nyano. Chennevière-sur-Marne: Dianoïa, (2001).
Espinoza, Miguel. Théorie de l’intelligibilité. 2e édition. (Paris: Ellipses / Édition Marketing S.A., 1998).
Feyerabend, Paul. Farewell to Reason. (London: Verso, 1987).
Feyerabend, Paul Karl. Against Method. Outline of an Anarchistic Theory of Knowledge. (London and New York: Verso, 1993).
Fine, Arthur. ‘The Natural Ontological Attitude’. In Scientific Realism, edited by Jarrett Leplin, 83–107. California: University of California Press, 1984.
Hacking, Ian. ‘Let’s Not Talk About Objectivity’. In Flavia Padovani, Alan Richardson & Jonathan Y. Tsou (Eds.), Objectivity in Science: New Perspectives From Science and Technology Studies. Cham: Boston Studies in the Philosophy and History of Science, Vol. 310. Springer, (2015): 19–33,.
Harding, Sandra. Objectivity and Diversity. Another Logic of Scientific Research. (Chicago and London: University of California Press, 2015).
Hegel, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich. The Philosophy of History. Translated by J. Sibree. Kitchener, (Ontario: Batoche Books, 2001).
Holton, Gerald. Einstein, History, and Other Passions : The Rebellion Against Science at the End of the Twentieth Century. (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press., 2000). http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:23975375.
Holton, Gerald. ‘Perspectives on the Thematic Analyses of Scientific Thought’. Victory and Vexation in Science: Einstein, Bohr, Heisenberg, and Others, (2005): 135–51. http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:37894289.
Holton, Gerald. ‘Sur Les Processus de l’invention Scientifique Devant Les Percées Révolutionnaires’. In Science et Symboles. Les Voies de La Connaissance. Colloque de Tsukuba, edited by Michel Cazenave,. Paris: Albin Michel, (1986): 53–75.
Holton, Gerald. The Scientific Imagination. (Cambridge Edited by MA: Harvard University., 1998).
Holton Gerald. Thematic Origins of Scientific Thought: Kepler to Einstein. Revised ed. Cambridge, (Massachusetts and London: MA: Harvard University Press, 1988). http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:23975383
Jacob, Pierre. ‘Controverse Entre Neurath et Schlick’. In Le Cercle de Vienne. Doctrines et Controverses, edited by Jean Sebestik and Antonia Soulez. (Paris: L’Harmattan, 2001).
Jacquaart, Albert, and Jacques Lacarrière. Science et Croyances. Coll. Espaces Libres. (Paris: Albin Michel, 1999).
Jarrosson, Bruno. Invitation à La Philosophie Des Sciences. Coll. Sciences Points. (Paris: Éditions du Seuil, 1992).
Kaiser, David. ‘Bringing the Human Actors Back on Stage: The Personal Context of the Einstein-Bohr Debate’. The British Journal for the History of Science 27, no. 2 (1994): 129–52.
Kamaheu, Jean-Paul. ‘La Science Au Risque de La Philosophie Du Langage Chez Thomas Samuel Kuhn. Vers Une Approche Institutionnelle de l’objectivité Scientifique ?’ Université Catholique de l’Afrique de l’Ouest/Unité Universitaire à Abidjan (UCAO/UUA), (2014).
Kuhn, Thomas S. The Essential Tension: Selected Studies in Scientific Tradition and Change. (Chicago & London: University of Chicago Press, 1977).
Kuhn, Thomas S. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. 4. ed. (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 2012).
Kumar, Manjit. Quantum: Einstein, Bohr, and the Great Debate about the Nature of Reality. PDF. (London: Icon Books, 2009).
Lakatos, Imre. The Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes: Philosophical Papers. Volume 1. Edited by John Worrall and Gregory Currie. (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1989).
Latour, Bruno. La Science En Action. Introduction à La Sociologie Des Sciences. Translated by Michel Biezunski. Coll. Folio/ Essaie. (Paris: Gallimard, 1987).
Lecourt, Dominique. La Philosophie Des Sciences. Que Sais-Je? (Paris: PUF, 2001).
Léna, Soler. Introduction à l’épistémologie. Nouvelle Édition Revue et Augmentée [d’un Chapitre]. (Paris: Ellipses, 2009).
Lévy-Leblond, Jean-Marc. Aux Contraires. L’exercice de La Pensée et La Pratique de La Science. (Paris: Éditions Gallimard, 1996).
Lévy-Leblond, Jean-Marc. L’esprit de Sel: Science, Culture, Politique. Coll. Points Science. (Paris: Éditions du Seuil, 1984).
Lorenz, Konrad, and Karl Popper. L’avenir Est Ouvert. Coll. Champs. (Paris: Éditions Flammarion, 1995).
Malherbe, Jean-François. Épistémologies Anglo-Saxonnes. (Namur/Paris: Presses universitaires de Namur/Presses universitaires de France, 1981).
Malolo-Dissaké, Emmanuel. Grammaires de l’objectivité Scientifique. Au Coeur de l’Epistémologie de Karl Popper. (Chennevrières-sur-Marne: Edited by Dianoia 2012).
Malolo Dissaké, Emmanuel. ‘L’objectivité-Pureté, Le Cercle de Vienne et Son Opposition Officielle’. Maât - Revue Philosophique Africaine, no. 2 (2000): 63–94.
Morin, Edgar. Science Avec Conscience. Nouv. Édit. (Paris: Editions du Seuil, 1990).
Neurath, Otto. Empiricism and Sociology. Edited by Marie Neurath and Robert S. Cohen. (Dordrecht-Holland/Boston-USA: D. Reidel Publishing Company, 1973).
Neusch, Marcel. Aux Sources de l’athéisme Contemporain. Cent Ans de Débats Sur Dieu. (Paris: Éditions du Centurion, 1993).
Poincaré, Henri. The Value of Science. Translated by George Bruce Halsted. (New York: Dover Publications INC., 1958).
Popper, Karl. Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific. (London and New York: Routledge, 2002).
Popper, Karl. Objective Knowledge: An Evolutionary Approach. (Revised ed. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1974).
Popper, Karl. The Logic of Scientific Discovery. Edited by Routledge. The Logic of Scientific Discovery. (London and New York, 2005). https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203994627.
Popper, Karl. Unended Quest: An Intellectual Autobiography. 2nd ed. Routledge Classics. (London and New York: Taylor and Francis, 2005).
Popper, Karl Raimund. ‘The Logic of Social Sciences’. In The Positivist Dispute in German Sociology, edited by Theodor W. Adorno, Albert Hans, Ralf Dahrendorf, Jürgen Habermas, Harald Pilot, and Karl R. Popper,. (London: Heinemann, 1976): 87–104
Proust, Joëlle. ‘Empirisme et Objectivité’. In Le Cercle de Vienne. Doctrines et Controverses, edited by Jan Sebestik and Antonia Soulez. (Paris: L’Harmattan, 2001).
Schlick, Moritz. ‘Le Vécu, La Connaissance, La Métaphysique’. In Manifeste Du Cercle de Vienne et Autres Écrits, edited by Antonia Soulez. (Paris: PUF, 1985).
Schopenhauer, Arthur. The World as Will and Representation, In Two Volumes : Volume I. Translated by E. F. J. Payne. 1st ed. (New York: Dover Publications, INC., 1966).
Stengers, Isabelle. The Invention of Modern Science. Translated by Daniel W Smith. (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2000).
Toulmin, Stephen. ‘Science And Scientists: The Problem Of Objectivity’. Minerva 12, no. 4 (1974): 522–529. http://www.jstor.org/stable/41806228.
Ullmo, Jean. La Pensée Scientifique Moderne. Coll. Cham. (Paris: Flammarion, 1969).
Wagner, Pierre, ed. Les Philosophes et La Science. Coll. Folio/ Essais. (Paris: Gallimard, 2002).
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Georges Alahou
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
.png)
