Seyed Saied Mirahmadi
Abstract
Newton considered the dynamical effects exerted upon accelerating bodies (such as the concavity of the surface of the water in Newton’s bucket experiment, etc.) to be caused by their acceleration relative to absolute space. Following Mach’s ideas, Einstein, based on the thought that all motion ...
Read More
Newton considered the dynamical effects exerted upon accelerating bodies (such as the concavity of the surface of the water in Newton’s bucket experiment, etc.) to be caused by their acceleration relative to absolute space. Following Mach’s ideas, Einstein, based on the thought that all motion is relative, knew very well that if he could show that the inertial effects are actually due to the acceleration relative to distant matter instead of absolute space, then he would be able to dispose of the Newtonian concepts of absolute space and motion. There is a widespread belief that the general theory of relativity get rid of the preferred (inertial) frames corresponding to Newtonian absolute space and time. In this article, by examining Einstein’s thought process in creating the general theory of relativity, the claim: despite Einstein’s efforts and contrary to the name of the theory, Mach’s principle in the sense of “relativity of all motion” or “inertial forces are exerted by matter, not by absolute spacetime” is neither included in the principles of the general theory of relativity nor results from it, is confirmed. Therefore, the absolute elements such as “absolute rest and motion”, “absolute acceleration”, “absolute inertial forces” and “absolute spacetime” are yet essentially retained in the general theory of relativity. Due to the epistemological importance of Mach’s principle, the effort to provide an efficient physical theory based on this principle continues.
Emad Tayebi; Alireza Mansouri
Abstract
The ontological problem of technical artifacts is: what makes an object count as a technical artifact? Most theories have investigated the ontology of artifacts in terms of ‘function’. A group of these theories has highlighted the physical structure of the artifact because of its causal role ...
Read More
The ontological problem of technical artifacts is: what makes an object count as a technical artifact? Most theories have investigated the ontology of artifacts in terms of ‘function’. A group of these theories has highlighted the physical structure of the artifact because of its causal role in realizing the function; Others, taking ‘function’ and ‘intention’ the same, have emphasized agents’ intention in the design and use of artifacts. Some have considered the evolution of artifacts, their history of selection and reproduction, to be effective in the constitution of their ontology. Due to the shortcomings of causal, intentional, and evolutionary theories, attempts have been made to present hybrid theories. This paper, along with an overview and evaluation of the most important theories of the ontology of technical artifacts, aims to spell out the problems which any adequate ontology of artifacts needs to answer.
Parisa Saatchi Fard; Keyvan Alasti
Abstract
In all periods of history, human has been trying to "understand". In order to understanding the natural world, scientists first observe samples and then classify them based on similarity. To figure out the actions of people, the matter seems different. To achieve this, we need to understand the intentions ...
Read More
In all periods of history, human has been trying to "understand". In order to understanding the natural world, scientists first observe samples and then classify them based on similarity. To figure out the actions of people, the matter seems different. To achieve this, we need to understand the intentions of people. Because intention has psychological nature, there is always a concern from empiricists that it may not be perceptible by third-person people. To some extent, many human actions are perceptible from a third-person point of view, and this causes them to be the subject of scientific investigations (with common scientific methods). However, there are cases that show the understanding of human activities from the third person of view has limitations.Stephen Grimm introduces a type of understanding and believes that by realising the specific goals of the person being understood as a desired action, we will achieve a deeper understanding. In this article, an attempt has been made to clarify the discussed issue first by proposing and interpreting Stephen Grimm's point of view, and then by proposing the problems and explaining the ambiguities of Grimm's idea, as an alternative formulation, we will show that the agent's decision for understanding or not understanding the actions of others, plays an important role. Empathy is known as a psychological capacity that can be understood in a different way by simulating the structure.Investigating and looking deeper into this issue will help us to judge it better as a method or an idea in social and human sciences.
Javad Akbari Takhtameshlou; Seyed Mehdi Hosseini Nasab
Abstract
Since the beginning of the 20th century, philosophers of science—both realist and anti-realist—have shown a special tendency toward the concept of ‘structure’, mainly to address certain problems in the process of understanding science (particularly some serious problems arising ...
Read More
Since the beginning of the 20th century, philosophers of science—both realist and anti-realist—have shown a special tendency toward the concept of ‘structure’, mainly to address certain problems in the process of understanding science (particularly some serious problems arising from successive and deep changes in scientific theories over time). In this regard, different forms of ‘structuralism’ have been developed thus far around the belief that science is only capable of revealing the structure of the world (and not the ontological characteristics of its objects). However, all structuralisms have been subjected to a very serious criticism known as ‘Newman's objection’, which states that if structure is supposed to be the most we know about the world, then the only thing we will actually know about the world is cardinality, i.e., the number of related objects.Given the importance of structuralism in the philosophy of science as well as the seriousness of Newman's objection, the goal of this paper is to introduce both realist and anti-realist scientific structuralism and examine and evaluate how successfully they respond to this criticism. The findings of this examination suggest that both of these structuralisms are incapable or at least substantially problematic in answering Newman's objection, mostly due to their structuralist nature and underlying ideas.
Hadi Samadi
Abstract
This article is an evolutionary defense of Evidence-Based Medicine (EBM), which is an approach to medicine that considers researches published in reputable medical journals as the main basis of therapeutic interventions. In this approach, physician’s personal experiences and her intuition, and ...
Read More
This article is an evolutionary defense of Evidence-Based Medicine (EBM), which is an approach to medicine that considers researches published in reputable medical journals as the main basis of therapeutic interventions. In this approach, physician’s personal experiences and her intuition, and mechanical explanations for medical interventions are deemphasized. Since the advent of EBM, many criticisms have been made on it. Two of them will be mentioned in this article. First, it has been claimed that the replication crisis is a threat for EBM. Second, according to critics, EBM is based on a kind of extreme empiricism, while there are many criticisms for this kind of empiricism. From an evolutionary point of view some rejoinders have been offered to these criticisms. We will also see how to update the theoretical foundations of EBM in the light of these criticisms. In this regard, a defense is presented that in two cases, medical implications can be carried out rationalistically, that is, by considering general medical theories: first, to abandon or ignore any "seemingly" harmless medical advice; and two, by rejecting unqualified articles. At the end, it is mentioned that although by doing so we may reduce the speed of new data entrance in medicine, but from an evolutionary point of view, this level of conservatism is necessary to maintain the credibility of medicine.
)
