Skip Nav Destination
Close Modal
Update search
NARROW
Format
Journal
Date
Availability
1-3 of 3
Jeff Kochan
Close
Follow your search
Access your saved searches in your account
Would you like to receive an alert when new items match your search?
Sort by
Journal Articles
Publisher: Journals Gateway
Perspectives on Science (2022) 30 (4): 783–817.
Published: 01 August 2022
Abstract
View article
PDF
Anthropologist Tim Ingold promotes Indigenous animism as a salve for perceived failures in modern science; failures he claims also hobbled his own early work. In fact, both Ingold’s early and later work rely on modern scientific ideas and images. His turn to animism marks not an exit from the history of European science, but an entrance into, and imaginative elaboration of, distinctly Neoplatonic themes within that history. This turn marks, too, a clear but unacknowledged departure from systematic social analysis. By re-embracing social analysis, Ingold would overcome the obscurity that now hobbles his later work.
Journal Articles
Publisher: Journals Gateway
Perspectives on Science (2021) 29 (2): 157–188.
Published: 01 April 2021
Abstract
View article
PDF
William Gilbert’s 1600 book, De magnete , greatly influenced early modern natural philosophy. The book describes an impressive array of physical experiments, but it also advances a metaphysical view at odds with the soon to emerge mechanical philosophy. That view was animism. I distinguish two kinds of animism – Aristotelian and Platonic – and argue that Gilbert was an Aristotelian animist. Taking Robert Boyle as an example, I then show that early modern arguments against animism were often effective only against Platonic animism. In fact, unacknowledged traces of Aristotelian animism can be found in Boyle’s mechanical account of nature. This was Gilbert’s legacy.
Journal Articles
Publisher: Journals Gateway
Perspectives on Science (2011) 19 (1): 81–115.
Published: 01 May 2011
Abstract
View article
PDF
Joseph Rouse has drawn from Heidegger's early philosophy to develop what he calls a “practical hermeneutics of science.” With this, he has not only become an important player in the recent trend towards practice-based conceptualisations of science, he has also emerged as the predominant expositor of Heidegger's philosophy of science. Yet, there are serious shortcomings in both Rouse's theory of science and his interpretation of Heidegger. In the first instance, Rouse's practical hermeneutics appears confused on the topic of realism. In the second instance, Rouse suppresses Heidegger's distinction between existence and essence, and hence fails to grasp the latter's corollary distinction between scientific research and everyday practice. I argue that, by accepting a correction in his interpretation of Heidegger, Rouse would find the means to resolve the debilitating tensions in his stance towards realism.