Why so complicated?

Publication Type:

Language:

Transliteration of original Title: 
Zachem tak uslozhnyat'?
Author(s): 
Tatiana Sokolova
Institute of Philosophy, Russian Academy of Sciences
Issue number: 
No.2 (Vol.52)
Pages: 
47-51
Abstract: 

In the article, author criticizes some points made by S.M. Gavrilenko regarding the status of historical epistemology and other social and humanitarian disciplines. Here the author relies mainly on the French tradition of historical epistemology, as well as emphasizes the need to keep clear the disciplinary boundaries between epistemology, philosophy of science, history and sociology of science.

Keywords: 
historical epistemology, social sciences, French epistemology, sociology of science, philosophy of science
References: 

Bachelard, G. “L’actualité de l’histoire des sciences”, in: Bachelard G. L’engagement rationaliste. Paris: PUF, 1972, pp. 137–155.
Braunstein, J.-F. “Bachelard, Canguilhem, Foucault. Le ‘style français’ en épistémologie”, in: Les philosophes et la science. Paris: Gallimard, 2002, pp. 920–963.
Canguilhem, G. “Qu’est-ce que la psychologie?”, Revue de Métaphysique et de Morale, 1958, No. 1, pp. 12–25.
Engel, P. Philosophie et psychologie. Paris: Gallimard, 1996. 473 pp.

DOI: 
10.5840/eps201752228
Full Text: