Looking for Consistency in Avoiding Dualisms
Ewa Binczyk
Log in to download the full text for free
> Citation
> Similar
> References
> Add Comment
Abstract
Purpose: The text searches for possible uses of a daring postulate to reject dualism, formulated by Josef Mitterer. Furthermore, it explores the inconsistencies of dualism and its remnants in three projects: Richard Rorty’s neopragmatism, the strong program of the sociology of knowledge, and radical constructivism. The final aim of the argument is to demonstrate that a very interesting incorporation of Mitterer’s postulates is possible, and that it must take the form of a consistent antiessentialism. At this point the article presents Bruno Latour’s actor-network theory. Findings: The article underlines the specific role of the so-called other side of the discourse – which, according to Mitterer is fabricated by the dualizing mode of speaking. Such an instance is a priori essentialized and it plays a crucial role as a tool for settling arguments. The text traces the role of this instance in the concepts mentioned above. Benefits: Through the use of Latour’s constructivism, the text indicates that there exists a fruitful empirical (non-speculative) research program, which was projected in accordance with Mitterer’s postulates.
Key words: criticism of dualism, anti-essentialism, neopragmatism, strong programme, radical constructivism, actor-network theory
Citation
Binczyk E. (2008) Looking for consistency in avoiding dualisms. Constructivist Foundations 3(3): 201–208. http://constructivist.info/3/3/201
Export article citation data:
Plain Text ·
BibTex ·
EndNote ·
Reference Manager (RIS)
Similar articles
References
Barnes B., Bloor D. & Henry J. (1996) Scientific knowledge. A sociological analysis. Athlone, London.
▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Bińczyk E. (2007) Obraz, który nas zniewala. Wspólczesne ujęcia języka wobec esencjalizmu i problemu referencji. Universitas, Krakow.
▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Bloor D. (1999) Anti-Latour. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 30(1): 81–112.
▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Bloor D. (1999) Reply to Bruno Latour. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 30(1): 131–136.
▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Brandom R. B. (ed.) (2000) Rorty and his critics. Blackwell Publishers: Malden MA. Glasersfeld E. von (1992) Das Ende einer grossen Illusion. In: Fischer H. R., Retzer A. & Schweitzer J. (eds.) Das Ende der großen Entwürfe. Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am Main: 85–98. English translation “The end of a grand illusion” retrieved from http://www.univie.ac.at/constructivism/EvG/on 1 October 2005.
▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Latour B. (1999) For David Bloor… and beyond: A reply to David Bloor’s “Anti-Latour.” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 30(1): 113–129.
▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Latour B. (2004) Politics of nature. How to bring the sciences into democracy. Harvard University Press, Cambridge MA.
▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Luhmann N. (1990) The cognitive program of constructivism and a reality that remains unknown. In: Krohn W. & Küppers G. & Novotny H. (eds.) Selforganization. Portrait of a scientific revolution. Dordrecht, Kluwer: 64–85.
▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Shapin S. & Schaffer S. (1985) Leviathan and the air-pump: Hobbes, Boyle and the experimental life. Princeton University Press, Princeton NJ.
▸︎ Google︎ Scholar
Comments: 0
To stay informed about comments to this publication and post comments yourself, please log in first.
