Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12259/34199
Type of publication: Straipsnis kitose duomenų bazėse / Article in other databases (S4)
Field of Science: Filosofija / Philosophy (H001)
Author(s): Karoblis, Gediminas
Title: Fenomenologijos natūralizacija
Is part of: Soter : religijos mokslo žurnalas. Kaunas : Vytauto Didžiojo universiteto leidykla., 17 (2006)
Extent: p. 27-38
Date: 2006
Abstract: Šio t y r i m o p r i e l a i d a yra jau dešimtmetį besitęsiančios diskusijos apie sąmonę kaip pirmojo asmens perspektyvos 1 atitikmenį smegenų morfologinei ir funkcinei diferenciacijai ir su tuo susijusius sunkumus. Užsimezgusi diskusija tarp Chalmerso 2 ir Dennetto 3 įskėlė ir fenomenologų susidomėjimą. Kaip šių diskusijų pasekmė tarp fenomenologų kilo diskusija apie galimybę metodiškai derinti fenomenologiją su neuromokslų tyrinėjimų duomenimis. 4 Trumpai apibūdinant – tai f e n o m e n o l o g i j o s n a t ū r a l i z a c i j o s p r o b l e m a . Taigi šio t y r i m o t i k s l a s – išnagrinėti visus pasiūlymus ir argumentus, kurie išdėstyti sprendžiant šią problemą, ir pasiūlyti tam tikrą fenomenologinį sprendimą, kuris padėtų susieti pirmojo ir trečiojo asmens perspektyvas. Taikomi m e t o d a i – hermeneutinė-kritinė tekstų analizė ir fenomenologinis tyrimas
This article investigates the problem of naturalization of phenomenology, i.e. the problem of coordination of the first- and the third-person approaches in scientific inquiry. Contemporary classification of sciences is established on the basis of modern science tradition and recent trends in modern science. Five domains are distinguished in Lithuania: Humanities, Social sciences, Physical sciences, Biomedical sciences, Technological sciences. Nevertheless, this structure could and should be questioned philosophically and practically, looking for clarification, marginalities and alternatives. Referring to the main ideas of phenomenology, the first argument follows: the fields of scientific research are established not only as “object-fields”, but also as “intentional-fields”, including not only the object, but also the mode of approach to the object. Referring to the main ideas of structural semantics, the second argument follows: an already established intentional field develops by the means of involutionary differentiation. Therefore it is possible to distinguish intentionally established fields of differentiation (see 1 diagram) that are relevant for theoretical discussion of the classification of sciences, and also for practical aims of creating scientific interfaces and creation of multidisplinary teams. The recent project of naturalizing phenomenology formulated by multidisciplinary group of scientists is based on the idea of the interfaces between the fields of experiential and physical (including biomedical) or behavioural differentiation. In phenomenological sense, to naturalize means to switch to natural attitude. As Zahavi pointed it means to leave the attitude which keeps in transcendental phenomenology and keep to phenomenological descriptive psychology. And for phenomenology it means to be naturalized in cognitive science. [...]
Internet: https://eltalpykla.vdu.lt/1/34199
https://www.vdu.lt/cris/bitstream/20.500.12259/34199/1/ISSN2335-8785_2006_N_17_45.PG.27-38.pdf
https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12259/34199
Affiliation(s): Vytauto Didžiojo universitetas
Appears in Collections:SOTER: religijos mokslo žurnalas / SOTER: Journal of Religious Science 2006, nr. 17(45)
Universiteto mokslo publikacijos / University Research Publications

Files in This Item:
marc.xml11.22 kBXMLView/Open

MARC21 XML metadata

Show full item record

Page view(s)

38
checked on Aug 17, 2019

Download(s)

36
checked on Aug 17, 2019

Google ScholarTM

Check


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.