Showing papers by "Bielefeld University published in 1941"
TL;DR: Gilbert's De Magnete as discussed by the authors is the first printed book, written by an academically trained scholar and dealing with a topic of natural science, which is based almost entirely on actual observation and experiment.
Abstract: William Gilbert’s De Magnete appeared in 1600, six years before Galileo’s first publication, five years before Bacon’s Advancement of Learning; it is the first printed book, written by an academically trained scholar and dealing with a topic of natural science, which is based almost entirely on actual observation and experiment. In the learned literature of the period, among the writing of both contemporary university-scholars and the humanistic literacy, it is an isolated case. An analysis of the origins of its scientific method, therefore, is not only interesting in itself but is likely to throw some light on the origins of modern natural science in general. The results of Gilbert’s investigation of magnetism and electricity being generally known, we shall consider first a few characteristics of his method and shall then try to trace its sources. Unfortunately very little is known of Gilbert’s life and nothing at all of his way of working. The investigation, therefore, must be based entirely on his two printed books.
35 citations
TL;DR: The question of the existence of laws in history has frequently been discussed by both advocates and opponents of historical laws as mentioned in this paper, and it may be assumed that most of the difficulties in its application to other fields have their physical counterpart and can be clarified most easily with the help of physical concepts.
Abstract: The question as to the existence of laws in history has frequently been discussed. A new discussion may yet be useful, since some misconceptions based on incorrect comparisons with the natural sciences have been brought forward by both advocates and opponents of historical laws. We shall try to clarify the problem by applying a few ideas familiar to physicists and astronomers to the conditions peculiar to history. Physics is the most mature of all empirical sciences as to method. In physics the law-concept has been used for three hundred years. It may be assumed, therefore, that most of the difficulties in its application to other fields have their physical counterpart and can be clarified most easily with the help of physical concepts. A few preliminary examples of historical laws will be given towards the end of the article.
11 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors of this paper analyze the papers of Conrad-Martius more fully and refer to other authors occasionally as illustrations, and the peculiarity and scientific productivity of phenomenological method, therefore, can be studied best in a field which is as far removed from psychology as possible.
Abstract: When phenomenology was introduced as a new science by Husserl its methods were applied first to objects of logic. Later phenomenological investigation expanded gradually to the fields of psychology, ethics, esthetics, and sociology (Scheler, Pfander, Hildebrand, a.o.). More rarely, objects of the natural sciences have been treated phenomenologically. Scattered indications of this kind are to be found in authors who do not belong to the most intimate circle of Husserl’s school (Helmut Plessner, Kurt Goldstein, Walter Frost, E. Buenning). Extensively, however, the phenomenological method has been applied to objects of the natural sciences once only, namely by Hedwig Conrad-Martius, a favourite pupil of Husserl’s, in her Realontologie (Ontology of Reality) and Farben (Colors). Yet this less known branch of phenomenology is particularly interesting. Husserl stressed the basic difference between phenomenological ideation (Wesensschau) on the one hand and psychological introspection and description of the immediate data of awareness on the other. The peculiarity and scientific productivity of phenomenological method, therefore, can be studied best in a field which is as far removed from psychology as possible. We shall try to analyze the papers of Conrad-Martius more fully and shall refer to other authors occasionally as illustrations.
4 citations
TL;DR: In his review of my article "Phenomenology and natural science" as discussed by the authors, Mr. Walter Cerf does not represent the contents of the article quite correctly, and his analysis had not arbitrarily picked out some phenomenological paper, especially exposed to criticism, and endeavored by "ridiculing" it to deal "a deadly stroke" to the "entire life work of Husserl".
Abstract: In his review of my article “Phenomenology and Natural Science” Mr. Walter Cerf does not represent the contents of the article quite correctly. My analysis had not arbitrarily picked out some phenomenological paper, especially exposed to criticism, and endeavored by “ridiculing” it to deal “a deadly stroke” to the “entire life work of Husserl”. The article had rather carefully distinguished applications of the phenomenological method to problems of logic, of psychology and sociology, and of the natural sciences. It had expressly restricted itself to analysis of this last “less known branch of phenomenology”. (Methodological objections to the other branches were indicated in the last eight lines only). It had selected the Realontologie of Hedwig Conrad-Martius as an instance because this paper is the only one in the Jahrbuch that deals with physical facts, although similar expositions are not rare in phenomenologically influenced contemporary philosophical literature. Mr. Cerf rejects Miss Conrad-Martius’ “unfortunate” paper as “romantic revelries”. For the methodological reasons pointed out in my analysis I agree with his judgment and assume it will contribute to purifications of the phenomenological method and of philosophical method in general. Before Mr. Cerf—s admission, however, the Realontologie had not been adversely criticized in the numerous articles of the Jahrbuch on phenomenological methodology. On the contrary it had been at length and rather enthusiastically reviewed by a phenomenologically influenced philosopher in the official journal of the “Gesellschaft Deutscher Naturforscher and Arzte”, (Naturwissenschaften, vol. XIV, 1926, pp. 947 f.).
2 citations