ru | En
PHILOSOPHICAL
LITERARY
JOURNAL
ISSN 0869-5377
Author: Lyubarsky Georgy

Lyubarsky Georgy

Senior Research Fellow, Entomology Sector, lgeorgy@rambler.ru.
Zoological Museum of M. V. Lomonosov State University, 2 Bolshaya Nikitskaya St., 125009 Moscow, Russia.

Publications

The Origin of a New Kind of Science From the Life Sciences / Logos. 2020. № 1 (134). P. 131-158
annotation:  Science in the modern era began with a process of synthesis; the natural sciences in particular emerged through a coalescence of several cultural traditions. Scientific knowledge arose in a series of several separate events as mathematics, philology, physics and biology emerged independently. Scientific ideas about natural life developed via a synthesis of three types of knowledge. (1) There was the tradition of herbalism as a type of knowledge of nature, and this approach remained close to the Aristotelian tradition of describing nature with a bookish method centered on descriptive practice. (2) The scholastic tradition clarified existing concepts and formed new ones. Its role was crucial in supplying nascent science with its set of cognitive tools. (3) The alchemical tradition provided experimental knowledge of nature as applied to human life. It was particularly important in building the skills needed to connect theoretical systems with reality. This synthesis in natural philosophy was the basis of Linnaean reforms. However, theoretical morphology was central to Linnaeus’ thinking and, its features were responsible for the success of his system.
Theoretical morphology offered ways to decide how a natural phenomenon should be reduced and divided into parts in order to serve as an object of scientific cognition. Essential theoretical precepts for this morphology were formulated by Andrea Cesalpino in De plantis libri XVI (1583). Hence, the origin of the natural sciences as a study of living nature should properly be traced to the 16th century. This strand in the development of the new scientific approach in Europe through studying living things should also be connected with earlier (medieval) efforts of the Dominican Order (promoting purer versions of Aristotelianism), while another strand which led to the appearance of physics and other more mathematically expressed branches of the natural sciences belongs to the Franciscan orders (more influenced by Neoplatonism). Science emerged then as profound and experimentally verifiable theoretical knowledge based on ideation through the construction of the objects of experimental research.

Keywords:  scientific revolution; Linnaeus reform; theoretical morphology; Andrea Cesalpino; ideation; mathematization

Lyubarsky Georgy

Senior Research Fellow, Entomology Sector, lgeorgy@rambler.ru.
Zoological Museum of M. V. Lomonosov State University, 2 Bolshaya Nikitskaya St., 125009 Moscow, Russia.

Publications

The Origin of a New Kind of Science From the Life Sciences / Logos. 2020. № 1 (134). P. 131-158
annotation:  Science in the modern era began with a process of synthesis; the natural sciences in particular emerged through a coalescence of several cultural traditions. Scientific knowledge arose in a series of several separate events as mathematics, philology, physics and biology emerged independently. Scientific ideas about natural life developed via a synthesis of three types of knowledge. (1) There was the tradition of herbalism as a type of knowledge of nature, and this approach remained close to the Aristotelian tradition of describing nature with a bookish method centered on descriptive practice. (2) The scholastic tradition clarified existing concepts and formed new ones. Its role was crucial in supplying nascent science with its set of cognitive tools. (3) The alchemical tradition provided experimental knowledge of nature as applied to human life. It was particularly important in building the skills needed to connect theoretical systems with reality. This synthesis in natural philosophy was the basis of Linnaean reforms. However, theoretical morphology was central to Linnaeus’ thinking and, its features were responsible for the success of his system.
Theoretical morphology offered ways to decide how a natural phenomenon should be reduced and divided into parts in order to serve as an object of scientific cognition. Essential theoretical precepts for this morphology were formulated by Andrea Cesalpino in De plantis libri XVI (1583). Hence, the origin of the natural sciences as a study of living nature should properly be traced to the 16th century. This strand in the development of the new scientific approach in Europe through studying living things should also be connected with earlier (medieval) efforts of the Dominican Order (promoting purer versions of Aristotelianism), while another strand which led to the appearance of physics and other more mathematically expressed branches of the natural sciences belongs to the Franciscan orders (more influenced by Neoplatonism). Science emerged then as profound and experimentally verifiable theoretical knowledge based on ideation through the construction of the objects of experimental research.

Keywords:  scientific revolution; Linnaeus reform; theoretical morphology; Andrea Cesalpino; ideation; mathematization
All authors

© 1991—2020 Логос. Философско-литературный журнал.
Все права защищены.
Дизайн Юлия Михина, jmikhina@gmail.com,
программирование Антон Чубченко