Увійти

Готові списки джерел за темами / Philosophy of nature / Статті в журналах

Щоб переглянути інші типи публікацій з цієї теми, перейдіть за посиланням: Philosophy of nature.

Статті в журналах з теми "Philosophy of nature"

Автор: Grafiati

Опубліковано: 4 червня 2021

Оновлено: 29 липня 2024

Оформте джерело за APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard та іншими стилями

Оберіть тип джерела:

Ознайомтеся з топ-50 статей у журналах для дослідження на тему "Philosophy of nature".

Біля кожної праці в переліку літератури доступна кнопка «Додати до бібліографії». Скористайтеся нею – і ми автоматично оформимо бібліографічне посилання на обрану працю в потрібному вам стилі цитування: APA, MLA, «Гарвард», «Чикаго», «Ванкувер» тощо.

Також ви можете завантажити повний текст наукової публікації у форматі «.pdf» та прочитати онлайн анотацію до роботи, якщо відповідні параметри наявні в метаданих.

Переглядайте статті в журналах для різних дисциплін та оформлюйте правильно вашу бібліографію.

1

Strenski, Ivan. "Philosophy of (Lived) Religion." Studies in Religion/Sciences Religieuses 41, no. 1 (March 2012): 5–11. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0008429811430052.

Повний текст джерела

Анотація:

The cohabitation of philosophy with the study of religion has such a long history that we have not been motivated to consider the terms of that relationship. This paper proposes that this relationship needs to be examined radically. That is to say it proposes to query the nature, or possible natures, of the relationship of philosophy to the study of religion by posing such questions as the following: What kind of philosophy belongs in the study of religion? Constructive? Critical? Does philosophy have an independent role in the study of religion or does it, rather, best play the role of ‘handmaiden’? To the extent that philosophy plays an integral part in the study of religion, how should philosophy reflect the global and cross-cultural nature of the study of religion? To what extent does a philosophy that is integral to the study of religion need to change in order to reflect the philosophical agendas integral to other religions than Christianity? La cohabitation de la philosophie avec l’étude de la religion a une si longue histoire que nous ne nous sommes pas penchés sur les termes de cette relation. Cet article montre le besoin d’un examen radical de cette relation. C’est-à-dire qu’il propose d’interroger la nature, ou les natures possibles, de la relation que la philosophie entretient avec l’étude de la religion à partir de plusieurs questions: Quels types de philosophie font partie de l’étude de la religion? Constructive? Critique? La philosophie a-t-elle un rôle indépendant dans l’étude de la religion ou est-elle plutôt dans le rôle de « servir » ? Dans la mesure où la philosophie est une partie intégrante de l’étude de la religion, comment la philosophie devrait-elle refléter la nature mondiale et culturellement croisée de l’étude de la religion ? Dans quelle mesure, une philosophie faisant partie intégrante de l’étude de la religion doit-elle être transformée de façon à rendre compte des programmes des religions autres que la Chrétienté?

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

2

Lewens, Tim. "The nature of philosophy and the philosophy of nature." Biology & Philosophy 30, no. 4 (March 20, 2015): 587–96. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10539-015-9485-z.

Повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

3

Drees, Martin. "Evolution and Emanation of Spirit in Hegel's Philosophy of Nature." Hegel Bulletin 13, no. 02 (1992): 52–61. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s026352320000286x.

Повний текст джерела

Анотація:

Having studied Hegel's philosophy, as it is epitomized in the Encyclopaedia, many scholars would be in agreement with David G Ritchie who, in his book on Darwin and Hegel (1893), remarked: “Everywhere in Hegel we read about Entwickelung; but of Evolution he does not speak in so friendly a manner.” Bearing in mind the distinction between “Entwicklung” (“development”) and “evolution” and recalling Hegel's criticism of conceptions of natural evolution in the initial section of the Philosophy of Nature, it is certainly not immediately evident why a serious scholar like John N Findlay should maintain that “if any philosopher is a philosopher of evolution, that philosopher is Hegel.” It can hardly be denied, however, that more recent studies in Hegel's philosophy can be used to support Findlay's statement to a certain extent. Not only has the relevance of Hegel's philosophy for an adequate understanding of organic life and its evolution been strongly emphasized; it has even been asserted that Hegel had at his disposal a concept of evolution essentially determining the methodic approach of his philosophy of nature. Now I would not venture to ascertain whether or not Hegel's concept of evolution is of present relevance for our understanding of nature and even less would I dare to decide on the hypothetical question whether or not Hegel, if he “had lived a little later, … would have given us an evolutionary, teleological theory of Nature as he did of mind in history.” In my paper, I would like to deal with a subject matter of more limited scope. Discussions concerning the systematic importance and present relevance of Hegel's concept of evolution tend to be somewhat vague and abstract as long as the meaning of “evolution” in Hegel's philosophy is anything but unequivocal. Therefore, I am going to attempt to outline a systematic reconstruction of the function of Hegel's concept of evolution within the conceptual framework of Hegel's encyclopaedic Philosophy of Nature. More precisely, I will try to elucidate: 1) the question whether or not Hegel's criticism of philosophic and scientific concepts of evolution led him to his own positive concept of evolution; 2) the question in what sense a specific Hegelian concept of evolution is relevant for the understanding of the notional development taking place between the logical “absolute Idea” and “subjective spirit”.

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

4

Callahan, Gene. "Philosophy of nature." British Journal for the History of Philosophy 26, no. 2 (May 25, 2017): 396–99. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09608788.2017.1328398.

Повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

5

Griswold, Charles L. "Nature and philosophy." Man and World 29, no. 2 (April 1996): 187–213. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/bf01248555.

Повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

6

Von Eggers, Nicolai. "Lived Ontologies." Symposium 24, no. 2 (2020): 100–123. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/symposium202024214.

Повний текст джерела

Анотація:

In this article, I analyze the relation between ontology and practical philosophy in Cicero’s work and the role Hellenistic philosophy plays within the work of Giorgio Agamben. I discuss the relation between life and ontology, between philosophy as a guide to living and philosophy as the study of being. Unlike philosophers who treat Hellenistic philosophy as a form of therapy (Nussbaum, Foucault, Hadot), I show how Agamben interprets Hellenistic philosophy as oppressive by turning the theory of being into an injunction of having-to-be. For Agamben, every philosophy implies a certain form of life, and it is thus impossible to distinguish between ontology and living. The aim of philosophy, therefore, is not to be therapeutic but rather to develop an ontology that will allow for humanity to live without oppression. Through a detailed reading of Cicero’s concept of “nature,” I develop the reading and critique of Cicero suggested by Agamben.Cet article analyse la relation entre l’ontologie et la philosophie pratique dans l’oeuvre de Cicéron et le rôle joué par la philosophie hellénistique dans l’oeuvre de Giorgio Agamben. Il discute la relation entre la vie et l’ontologie, entre la philosophie comme guide de savoir-vivre et la philosophie comme étude de l’être. Contrairement aux philosophes qui traitent la philosophie hellénistique comme une forme de thérapie (Nussbaum, Foucault, Hadot), je montre que Agamben interprète la philosophie hellénistique comme essentielle-ment oppressive en transformant la théorie de l'être en une injonction normative de devoir-être. Pour Agamben, toute philosophie implique une certaine forme de vie, rendant alors la distinction entre l’ontologie et la vie impossible. Ainsi, le but de la philosophie n'est pas d’être thérapeutique mais plutôt de développer une ontologie qui permettra à l’humanité de vivre sans oppression. Par une lecture du concept de la « nature » de Cicéron, je développe l’interprétation et la critique de Cicéron proposé par Agamben.

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

7

Sontag, Frederick. "The Philosophy of Nature." International Studies in Philosophy 21, no. 3 (1989): 128–29. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/intstudphil198921337.

Повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

8

Howe, Leslie A. "Philosophy and Nature Sports." Journal of the Philosophy of Sport 47, no. 1 (September 17, 2019): 142–46. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00948705.2019.1666719.

Повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

9

Losev, Aleksandr V. "Moral Nature of Philosophy." Izvestiya of Saratov University. New Series. Series: Philosophy. Psychology. Pedagogy 20, no. 2 (2020): 138–42. http://dx.doi.org/10.18500/1819-7671-2020-20-2-138-142.

Повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

10

Christensen, Darrel E. "The Philosophy of Nature." Idealistic Studies 22, no. 3 (1992): 226–32. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/idstudies199222325.

Повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

11

Dombrowski, Daniel A. "The Philosophy of Nature." Process Studies 18, no. 2 (1989): 139–40. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/process198918210.

Повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

12

Dombrowski, Daniel A. "The Philosophy of Nature." Process Studies 18, no. 2 (July 1, 1989): 139–40. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/44798528.

Повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

13

Muslim, Muslim. "Philosophy and Human Nature." Indonesian Journal for Islamic Studies 1, no. 1 (July 28, 2023): 32–37. http://dx.doi.org/10.58723/ijfis.v1i1.64.

Повний текст джерела

Анотація:

This research is to find out what philosophy is, to find out the philosophical views of human nature, to find out the relationship between human nature and philosophy. Philosophical thinking is knowledge, this is about knowledge starting with curiosity, certainty starting with doubt and philosophy starting with both of them. Science is a part of knowledge that is learned to be able to know everything in life. Often a person has a desire to know something. Something you want to know exists in everyday life. There are times, curiosity is just curiosity that A moment. Human nature is a servant and caliph of Allah on earth which consists of three elements, namely physical, intellectual and spiritual. This humans as servant and caliph of Allah on earth, then humans are God's creatures, creatures created in a helpless condition, needing help from other beings who have the ability to think, creatures who have reason, creatures who are always curious about everything, creatures who have the ability to speak, creatures who are able to make tools for social beings who are able to work together, creatures that are able to organize excrement to meet their needs, creatures that live on the basis of economic principles, creatures that are religious, rational beings who are free to act based on moral reasons, creatures with a social contract to respect and protect rights other people The link between human nature and philosophy also provides an understanding or awareness to humans of the meaning of knowledge about reality provided by philosophy.

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

14

Schönher, Mathias. "Gilles Deleuze’s Philosophy of Nature: System and Method in What is Philosophy?" Theory, Culture & Society 36, no. 7-8 (February 14, 2019): 89–107. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0263276418820954.

Повний текст джерела

Анотація:

For its elliptical style, What is Philosophy? appears to be fragmentary and inscrutable, and its reception has been correspondingly contentious. Following an intimation by Gilles Deleuze himself, this article proposes that his final book, written in collaboration with Félix Guattari, contains a philosophy of nature. To address this proposition, the article begins by outlining the comprehensive system of nature set out in What is Philosophy?, defining it as an open system in motion that conjoins philosophy with the historical preconditions and intersects it with science and art. The article then addresses the precise method whereby the philosopher as an individual subject, emerging from nature, can succeed in becoming creative – that is, in creating concepts to bring forth new events. Finally, the brain turns out to be the pivot between the system and this method. What is Philosophy? thus presents an account of the brain based on a theory of the three specific planes of philosophy, science and art, and uses it to expand upon the idea of assemblage for a philosophy of nature.

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

15

Каraeva, Zina, and Mariam Edilova. "SUBJECTIVITY OF FEMALE NATURE IN CH. AITMATOV’S NOVEL “JAMIYLA”." Alatoo Academic Studies 22, no. 2 (June 30, 2022): 447–51. http://dx.doi.org/10.17015/aas.2022.222.56.

Повний текст джерела

Анотація:

In this article the story of the writer and philosopher Ch. Aitmatov’s “Jamiyla” is researched in the context of the philosophy of gender (philosophy of women and men). Many peoples of the world including the Kyrgyz patriarchal culture gave priority to men and women are considered as passive objects. The figure of Jamiyla by Ch. Aitmatov showed the beautiful nature of Kyrgyz women as a self-confident human being who is entitled to all rights. Identifying the women as not a passive object but active human being. Ch. Aitmatov proves the existence of radical feminism and gender theory in the real life.

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

16

Edilova, Mariam, and Zina Karaeva. "SUBJECTIVITY OF FEMALE NATURE IN CH. AITMATOV’S NOVEL “JAMIYLA”." Alatoo Academic Studies 2022, no. 3 (September 30, 2022): 395–400. http://dx.doi.org/10.17015/aas.2022.223.48.

Повний текст джерела

Анотація:

In this article the story of the writer and philosopher Ch. Aitmatov “Jamiyla” is considered in the context of the philosophy of gender (philosophy of women and men). Many peoples of the world including the Kyrgyz patriarchal culture gave priority to men and women considered as a passive object. Through the figure of Jamiyla Ch. Aitmatov showed a beautiful nature of Kyrgyz women as a self-confident human being who is entitled to all rights. Identifying the women as not passive object but active human Ch. Aitmatov proves the existence of radical feminism and gender theory in the real life. Keywords: рatriarchal culture, feminism, gender relations, individual subjectivity.

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

17

Llored, Jean-Pierre. "How Philosophy of Nature Needs Philosophy of Chemistry." Philosophica: International Journal for the History of Philosophy 24, no. 47 (2016): 93–108. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/philosophica2016244723.

Повний текст джерела

Анотація:

This paper aims to highlight how the philosophy of chemistry could be of help for rethinking Nature today. To do so, we will point out: (1) the co-definition of chemical relations (transformations) and chemical relata (bodies) within chemical activities; (2) the constitutive role of the modes of intervention in the definition, always open and provisional, of “active” chemical bodies; and (3) the mutual dependence of the levels of organization in chemistry. We will insist on the way chemists tailor networks of interdependencies within which chemical bodies and properties are context-sensitive and mutually determined by means of particular chemical operations or transformations. To conclude, we will show how the specific action of bodies upon the Earth at different scales of space and time, and how the relational definition of a chemical body, pave the way for a new understanding of Nature.

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

18

MEYERSON, EMILE. "PHILOSOPHY OF NATURE AND PHILOSOPHY OF THE INTELLECT." Philosophical Forum 37, no. 1 (March 2006): 85–110. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9191.2006.00231.x.

Повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

19

Blum, Christopher O. "Nature and Modernity." Proceedings of the American Catholic Philosophical Association 91 (2017): 51–62. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/acpaproc2019102193.

Повний текст джерела

Анотація:

A conspicuous feature of modernity has been the rejection of nature as an authoritative ground of intelligibility and value, a position once defended by nearly all Catholic philosophers. Since Fr. Ernan McMullin’s 1969 article, “Philosophies of Nature,” however, the philosophy of nature has been eclipsed by the philosophy of science in mainstream Catholic philosophy. After examining McMullin’s reasons for setting aside the philosophy of nature and Thomas Nagel’s recent re-affirmation of the possibility of a philosophical reflection upon nature prior to the claims of empirical science, this article responds to McMullin’s critique and defends the viability of an Aristotelian understanding of nature today.

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

20

De Haan, Daniel D. "Is Philosophy of Nature Irrelevant?" Proceedings of the American Catholic Philosophical Association 93 (2019): 327–48. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/acpaproc2021423116.

Повний текст джерела

Анотація:

I contend that the classical approach of Thomists to internecine Thomist debates about the requirements for initiating the enquiries of natural philosophy and metaphysics generates an epistemological crisis which this classical approach cannot overcome on its own terms. Furthermore, the failure of this classical approach to resolve these intractable debates has all too often distracted and stymied Thomists from contributing to the real enquiries of philosophy of nature. This explains, in part, why the most cogent and influential defenders of a return to Aristotelian ideas concerning nature and their relevance to modern science, has come from analytic philosophers unconcerned with these classical Thomist debates. But Thomism need not render itself irrelevant to the philosophy of nature; or so I argue in this essay. I first present a surview of how a classical interpretation of Aristotle’s division of theoretical sciences generated these debates about the relationship between the subjects of metaphysics and natural philosophy. I then argue neither Wippel’s ingenious efforts to secure the autonomy of metaphysics from natural philosophy nor the arguments for the existence of an immaterial being of the natural philosophy first proponents succeed. Hence, the intractable stalemate between these Thomists. Drawing upon the insights of Alasdair MacIntyre I argue for an alternative approach that overcomes this epistemological crisis and helps to secure the relevance of Thomism to the enquiries of philosophy of nature.

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

21

Lazerowitz, Morris. "Wittgenstein: The Nature of Philosophy." Crítica (México D. F. En línea) 19, no. 56 (December 10, 1987): 3–17. http://dx.doi.org/10.22201/iifs.18704905e.1987.644.

Повний текст джерела

Анотація:

Wittgenstein, con mayor profundidad que cualquier otro filósofo, comprendió la naturaleza de la filosofía. Sus observaciones acerca de ella se asemejan a los diagnósticos de un sicoanalista sobre su paciente. La filosofía era para él una aberración neurótica en espera de tratamiento. De ahí que, desde su perspectiva, comprender un problema filosófico sea de hecho solucionarlo. Lo que el filósofo pretende es alterar los modos establecidos de expresión, creyendo al mismo tiempo que dice algo profundo acerca de la naturaleza de las cosas. No se percata de que sus proposiciones.son semánticamente ociosas. Ejemplos notables son las tesis de Heraclito de que todo fluye y la solipsista de que sólo mis experiencias son reales. Como en muchos otros casos de proposiciones filosóficas, en estos se pretende retirar de la circulación una frase (e.g., 'permanece el mismo') mientras que se mantiene fija su antitesis. Las tesis filosóficas se refuerzan por fantasías inconscientes a las que dan expresión intelectual. También el solipsismo es una propuesta de cambio de convenciones lingüísticas, sin consecuencias para la conducta. Afirmaciones como la de que sólo yo soy real tienen, empero, la apariencia de una aseveración factual, pero en el fondo sólo crean la ilusión de que se esta diciendo algo profundo. Ésa es precisamente su función. Las oraciones solipsistas le confieren a sus usuarios un "monopolio del ego" altamente satisfactorio, presentando como una teoría lo que no es mas que una modificación lingüística. La posición solipsista tiene tres componentes: 1) un uso académico de palabras como 'real' que hace que esta se aplique únicamente a la referenda del pronombre 'yo'; 2) una apariencia engañosa de que la oración solipsista es parte de una teoría que sirve para enunciar hechos y 3) una fantasía inconsciente de auto-agrandamiento narcisista generado por las connotaciones del uso académico de 'real'. [Alejandro Tomasini Bassols]

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

22

Gifford, Fred, Florian von Schilcher, and Neil Tennant. "Philosophy, Evolution and Human Nature." Philosophical Review 94, no. 4 (October 1985): 602. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2185256.

Повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

23

Schier, Flint, Florian von Schilcher, and Neil Tennant. "Philosophy, Evolution and Human Nature." Philosophical Quarterly 35, no. 139 (April 1985): 205. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2219349.

Повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

24

Song, Suk-Rang. "Merleau-Pongty’s Philosophy of Nature." Liberal Arts Innovation Center 2 (November 30, 2018): 67–76. http://dx.doi.org/10.54698/kl.2018.2.67.

Повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

25

Pedersen, Kusumita P. "Sri Chinmoy’s Philosophy of Nature." Journal of Dharma Studies 4, no. 1 (April 2021): 49–63. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s42240-021-00105-2.

Повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

26

Smyth, Bryan. "Merleau-Ponty’s Philosophy of Nature." Symposium 15, no. 2 (2011): 251–55. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/symposium201115247.

Повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

27

Wiznerowicz, Fred. "Ecological Philosophy. Nature, Technology, Society." Philosophy and History 19, no. 1 (1986): 31–32. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/philhist198619113.

Повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

28

Ryan, Mary Melville. "Nature and Philosophy for Children." Thinking: The Journal of Philosophy for Children 7, no. 4 (1988): 12–15. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/thinking1988743.

Повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

29

Oh, Shin-taek. "Therapeutic Nature in Kierkegaard’s Philosophy." Journal of Korean Philosophical Society 149 (February 28, 2019): 275–95. http://dx.doi.org/10.20293/jokps.2019.149.275.

Повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

30

Bannon, Bryan. "Merleau-Ponty’s Philosophy of Nature." Environmental Ethics 32, no. 4 (2010): 433–36. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/enviroethics201032448.

Повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

31

Konopka, Adam. "Merleau-Ponty’s Philosophy of Nature." Environmental Philosophy 7, no. 1 (2010): 90–93. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/envirophil20107110.

Повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

32

Cosans, Christopher E. "Aristotle's Anatomical Philosophy of Nature." Biology & Philosophy 13, no. 3 (July 1998): 311–39. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/a:1006515414945.

Повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

33

Jähnig, Dieter. "On Schelling’s Philosophy of Nature." Idealistic Studies 19, no. 3 (1989): 222–30. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/idstudies198919339.

Повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

34

Aleksandr YERMICHYOV. "The Nature of Russian Philosophy." Social Sciences 49, no. 003 (September 30, 2018): 148–55. http://dx.doi.org/10.21557/ssc.52637080.

Повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

35

Squire, Louise. "Philosophy of nature: rethinking naturalness." Green Letters 21, no. 3 (September 2, 2017): 317–19. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14688417.2017.1447808.

Повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

36

Alexy, Robert. "The Nature of Legal Philosophy." Ratio Juris 17, no. 2 (June 2004): 156–67. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9337.2004.00261.x.

Повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

37

Williamson, Diane. "The Philosophy of Human Nature." Teaching Philosophy 33, no. 2 (2010): 231–33. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/teachphil201033226.

Повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

38

Beebee, H. "Review: The Philosophy of Nature." Mind 113, no. 450 (April 1, 2004): 334–40. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/mind/113.450.334-a.

Повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

39

Žanić, Joško. "On the Nature of Philosophy." Metaphilosophy 51, no. 1 (January 2020): 3–13. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/meta.12400.

Повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

40

Gabbey, Alan. "The Philosophy of Nature (review)." Journal of the History of Philosophy 27, no. 4 (1989): 624–26. http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/hph.1989.0089.

Повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

41

Kedrov, I. A. "On the Nature in Relation to Reasonable Creatures." Reflexio 12, no. 2 (2019): 60–88. http://dx.doi.org/10.25205/2658-4506-2019-12-2-60-88.

Повний текст джерела

Анотація:

The article is the third part of “An Essay Concerning Philosophy of Nature”, the work of the Russian philosopher and psychologist Ivan Andreevich Kedrov (1811–1846), published in 1838. The text is brought into line with modern spelling and punctuation.

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

42

Kedrov, I. A. "On the Nature in Relation to Reasonable Creatures." Reflexio 12, no. 2 (2019): 63–91. http://dx.doi.org/10.25205/2658-4506-2019-12-2-63-91.

Повний текст джерела

Анотація:

The article is the third part of “An Essay Concerning Philosophy of Nature”, the work of the Russian philosopher and psychologist Ivan Andreevich Kedrov (1811–1846), published in 1838. The text is brought into line with modern spelling and punctuation.

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

43

Warka, Made. "The nature of justice in the perspective of the philosophy of science." Technium Social Sciences Journal 39 (January 8, 2023): 280–86. http://dx.doi.org/10.47577/tssj.v39i1.8095.

Повний текст джерела

Анотація:

In theory, sources of knowledge might also originate from the outcomes of reflection or contemplation rather than just from experimental or study results. A philosopher engages in reflection or contemplation when attempting to understand or identify the core of something having to do with legal principles. What is meant by justice is the most important philosophical topic when discussing the nature of justice. That is a question that pertains to the field of science philosophy. According to its core, the philosophy of science is a branch of general philosophy that provides responses to a number of inquiries regarding the nature of science. Science philosophy examines the philosophical underpinnings, presumptions, and implications of science, including the social and natural sciences. Philosophy of science studies the philosophical foundations, assumptions and implications of science, including the natural sciences and social sciences. Philosophy of science is closely related to epistemology and ontology.

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

44

Mussett, Shannon M. "Nature and Anti-Nature in Simone de Beauvoir’s Philosophy." Philosophy Today 53, no. 9999 (2009): 130–37. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/philtoday200953supplement36.

Повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

45

Chepurin, Kirill. "Nature, Spirit, and Revolution: Situating Hegel's Philosophy of Nature." Comparative and Continental Philosophy 8, no. 3 (September 2016): 302–14. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17570638.2016.1231879.

Повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

46

Moleski, Martin X. "Book Review: The Modeling of Nature: Philosophy of Science and Philosophy of Nature in Synthesis." Theological Studies 59, no. 1 (February 1998): 159–60. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/004056399805900121.

Повний текст джерела

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

47

Flores, Samuel Ortencio. "Returning to the Heavens: Plato’s Socrates on Anaxagoras and Natural Philosophy." Apeiron 53, no. 2 (May 26, 2020): 123–46. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/apeiron-2018-0052.

Повний текст джерела

Анотація:

AbstractReaders of Plato since antiquity have generally taken Socrates’ intellectual autobiography in the Phaedo as a signal of his turn away from the study of natural philosophy. They have turned instead to characters such as Timaeus for evidence of Plato’s pursuit of physics. This article argues that Plato’s Socrates himself developed a philosophy of nature in his criticism of Anaxagoras and his subsequent philosophic pursuits. Socrates’ autobiography places the study of nature in a foundational position within the development of his philosophic method. In the Apology, Socrates further elaborated his investigation into nature through his understanding of theology. Finally, in the Phaedrus, Socrates connects the study of nature with the study of rhetoric as tools for virtue. Therefore, Plato’s Socrates does not reject or abandon physics, as has often been suggested, but rather, he incorporates it into his own philosophic project and challenges its practitioners to connect their own inquiries with human affairs.

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

48

MacLennan, Bruce. "Philosophia Naturalis Rediviva: Natural Philosophy for the Twenty-First Century." Philosophies 3, no. 4 (November 19, 2018): 38. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/philosophies3040038.

Повний текст джерела

Анотація:

A revitalized practice of natural philosophy can help people to live a better life and promote a flourishing ecosystem. Such a philosophy is natural in two senses. First, it is natural by seeking to understand the whole of nature, including mental phenomena. Thus, a comprehensive natural philosophy should address the phenomena of sentience by embracing first- and second-person methods of investigation. Moreover, to expand our understanding of the world, natural philosophy should embrace a full panoply of explanations, similar to Aristotle’s four causes. Second, such a philosophy is natural by being grounded in human nature, taking full account of human capacities and limitations. Future natural philosophers should also make use of all human capacities, including emotion and intuition, as well as reason and perception, to investigate nature. Finally, since the majority of our brain’s activities are unconscious, natural philosophy should explore the unconscious mind with the aim of deepening our relation with the rest of nature and of enhancing well-being.

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

49

Boundas, Constantin V., Daniel W. Smith, and Ada S. Jaarsma. "Encounters with Deleuze." Symposium 24, no. 1 (2020): 139–74. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/symposium20202417.

Повний текст джерела

Анотація:

This interview, conducted over the span of several months, tracks the respective journeys of Constantin V. Boundas and Daniel W. Smith with the philosophy of Gilles Deleuze. Rather than “becoming Deleuzian,” which is neither desirable nor possible, these exchanges reflect an array of encounters with Deleuze. These include the initial discoveries of Deleuze’s writings by Boundas and Smith, in-person meetings between Boundas and Deleuze, and the wide-ranging and influential philosophical work on Deleuze’s concepts produced by both Boundas and Smith. At stake in this discussion are key contributions by Deleuze to continental philosophy, including the distinction between the virtual and the actual and the very nature of a “concept.” Also at stake is the formative or pedagogical impact of a philosopher, like Deleuze, on those who find and fully engage with his texts, concepts, and project. Cette interview, menée sur plusieurs mois, suit les parcours respectifs de Constantin V. Boundas et Daniel W. Smith avec la philosophie de Gilles Deleuze. Au lieu de « devenir Deleuzien, » ce qui n’est ni souhaitable ni possible, ces échanges reflètent un éventail de rencontres avec Deleuze. Il s’agit notamment des premières découvertes des écrits de Deleuze par Boundas et Smith, des rencontres en personne entre Boundas et Deleuze, et du travail philosophique vaste et in􀏔luent sur les concepts de Deleuze produit par Boundas et Smith. L’enjeu ici étant les contributions clés de Deleuze à la philosophie continentale, y compris la distinction entre le virtuel et l’actuel, et la nature même d’un « concept. » Mais il y a aussi l’impact formateur ou pédagogique d’un philosophe, comme Deleuze, sur ceux qui trouvent et s’engagent pleinement dans ses textes, ses concepts et ses projets.

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

50

Brown, Deborah Jean. "Nature, Artifice, and Discovery in Descartes’ Mechanical Philosophy." Philosophies 8, no. 5 (September 14, 2023): 85. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/philosophies8050085.

Повний текст джерела

Анотація:

It is often assumed that in the collapse of the Aristotelian distinction between art and nature that results from the rise of mechanical philosophies in the early modern period, the collapse falls on the side of art. That is, all of the diversity among natures that was explained previously as differences among substantial forms came to be seen simply as differences in arrangements of matter according to laws instituted by the “divine artificer”, God. This paper argues that, for René Descartes, the collapse occurs on both sides. Natures are artefacts of God, and human artefacts, under some conditions, can be classified as natures or, at least, continuous within nature. Drawing on developments across both horticulture and engineering in the 16th and 17th centuries, as well as Descartes’ mechanical philosophy, this paper explores challenges to the Aristotelian nature/art distinction. The question then is what, in the advent of this collapse, are human artificers doing when they construct artefacts? Are they replicating God’s powers by creating new natures, or are they doing something else, and if so, what might that be? It is argued that we should view human invention for Descartes not as creating new natures so much as discovering them. These findings have consequences for how we interpret Descartes’ use of the term “nature” in relation to automata and other artefacts produced by human hands.

Стилі APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO та ін.

Ми пропонуємо знижки на всі преміум-плани для авторів, чиї праці увійшли до тематичних добірок літератури. Зв'яжіться з нами, щоб отримати унікальний промокод!