de lavi | feb. 23, 2012 | Anunturi, Conferinte, Facultate
Departamentul de Filosofie Teoretica organizeaza, joi 1 martie 2012, orele 16.00-18.00, in amfiteatrul „Mircea Florian” o dezbatere despre filmul lui Andrei Tarkovski ‘Andrei Rubliov’. Vor participa Gabriel Vacariu, Mihai Vacariu, Catalin Rusu. Discutia va fi urmata de intrebari din partea audientei. Intrarea libera
de lavi | feb. 21, 2012 | Anunturi, Conferinte
3rd Bucharest Colloquium in Early Modern Science
Creative experiments:
Heuristic and Exploratory Experimentation in Early Modern Science
24-25 March 2012
Faculty of Philosophy
University of Bucharest
Organizers:
Center for the Logic, History and Philosophy of Science – Faculty of Philosophy University of Bucharest
Research Center for the Foundations of Modern Thought – University of Bucharest
Convenor: Dana Jalobeanu
Venue:
Faculty of Philosophy
Splaiul Independentei 204
Bucharest
http://www.filosofie.unibuc.ro/
This third edition of the Bucharest colloquium in early modern science is organized as an event of the grant PN-II-ID-PCE-2011-3-0719: From natural history to science: the emergence of experimental philosophy
The past decade has seen a renewed interest in early modern experimentation. In particular, in its cognitive, psychological and social facets, as well as the complex interrelations between epistemic categories like experience, observation and experiment. Meanwhile, comparatively little has been done towards providing a more detailed, contextual and specific study of what might be described, a bit anachronistically, as the methodology of early modern experimentation. This ‘methodology’ comprises the ways in which philosophers, naturalists, promoters of mixed mathematics and artisans put experiments together, and the ways in which they reflected on the capacity of experiments to extend, refine and test hypotheses, on the limits of experimental activity, and on the heuristic power of experimentation.

So far, the sustained interest in the role played by experiments in early modern science has usually centered on ‘evidence’-related problems. This line of investigation favors examination of the experimental results but neglected the ‘methodology’ that brought about the results in the first place. It also neglects the creative and exploratory roles that experiments could and did play in the works of sixteenth- and seventeenth-century explorers of nature.
This colloquium aims to investigate particular cases of early modern experiments or early modern discussions of experimental methodology. We aim to put together a selection of interesting and perhaps relevant case studies that might lead to an innovative and fruitful line of research, namely the investigation of the heuristic, analogical and creative role of early modern experiments.
The intention of the organizers is to publish some or all the papers presented at the colloquium as a special issue of the Journal of Early Modern Studies. In view of this, the participants are kindly asked to circulate their papers 1 week before the beginning of the workshop.
Invited speakers:
- Dan Garber (Princeton University), Glanvill, More, and the ghosts of Humanism in the Royal Society
- Stephen Clucas (Birbeck College, University of London), Experientia literata and the experimental scrupulosity of Thomas Harriot
- Christoph Lüthy (Radboud University, Leyden), The hopes of seventeenth-century microscopists (and their apparent twentieth-century validation)
- Cesare Pastorino (University of Sussex), Francis Bacon and the shape of “Experientia Literata”: the role of technical inventions
- Epaminondas Vampoulis (University of Thessaloniki), Seventeenth-century experiments concerning the nature of matter
- Sorana Corneanu (University of Bucharest), “Much experience of Fact, and much evidence of Truth”: John Hartcliffe, Thomas Sprat, and the transformation of the intellectual virtues in an experimental context
- Sebastian Mateiescu (New Europe College and University of Bucharest), Philip Melanchthon and the doctrine of ‘universal experimentation’
- Ian Stewart (University of King’s College, Halifax), Bacon’s assessment of William Gilbert on experiment: theoria and praxis
- Maarten van Dyck (University of Ghent), Galileo’s use of experimentation and the limits of nature
- Martine Pecharman (Maison Francaise, Oxford), From “New experiments” to “Great Experiment”: Blaise Pascal on the epistemology of physics”
- Vlad Alexandrescu (University of Bucharest), De l’usage de l’infini chez R. Descartes et J.B. Morin
- Doina Cristina Rusu (University of Bucharest, Radboud University, Nijmegen) Types of experiments and their function in Bacon’s “Sylva Sylvarum”
- Madalina Giurgea (University of Bucharest, University of Ghent), How instruments of measurement work epistemologically? Issac Beeckman’s study of impact
- Mihnea Dobre (University of Bucharest), Experimental physics in Cartesian natural philosophy
- Laura Georgescu (University of Bucharest), Same experiment, different uses: Norman’s “The New Attractive” and Gilbert’s “De magnete”
- Robert Lazu (New Europe College, Bucharest), Descartes, the Turing test and the change of attitudes towards automatons
- Grigore Vida (New Europe College, Bucharest)
- Dana Jalobeanu (University of Bucharest)
de lavi | feb. 18, 2012 | Conferinte
Seminarul de filosofie teoretica Miercuri 22 februarie, ora 18, Facultatea de Filosofie teoretica, Amfiteatrul Titu Maiorescu
Hylarie Kochiras (New Europe College, Bucharest) – Dimensional and Non-Dimensional Space and the Doctrine that the Spirit is Whole in Every Part
Abstract:
Against the backdrop of changing concepts of space, both dimensional and
non-dimensional, this paper considers the doctrine that the spirit is
whole in every part, along with the attacks it faced, in particular from
Henry More. I show that More’s attack upon it fails. He
illegitimately injects his own dimensionalist concept of spirit into a
doctrine historically associated with non-dimensionalist concepts; and
he accordingly fails to recognize that the doctrine was never intended
as a_ _means of securing the spirit’s indivisibility, but is rather a
consequence of a concept that secures the indivisibility all by itself.
Hylarie Kochiras was visiting assistant professor at the University at
Buffalo (2008-2010), a postdoctoral fellow at Pittsburg’s Center for
Philosophy of Science (2011-2012), and is currently a EURIAS fellow at
Bucharest’s New Europe College. Her research focuses upon Newton and
early modern philosophy of science, and her publications include
the _Stanford Encyclopedia_’s entry on Locke’s philosophy of
science, “Gravity and Newton’s Substance Counting Problem”, and
“Spiritual Presence and Dimensional Space beyond the Cosmos”
de lavi | ian. 28, 2012 | Anunturi, Conferinte
Miercuri, 1 februarie, seminarul departamentului de filosofie teoretica il va avea ca invitat pe:
Marius Dumitru (Christ Church, Oxford), care va sustine conferinta cu titlul:
„An Exercise in Analytic Phenomenology. Character Terraformation or the Relationship between Phenomenologies and Character Traits”.
Abstractul conferintei:
„A conscious subject enjoys a variety of phenomenologies at any moment in time: sensory-perceptual ones (visual, auditory, olfactory, gustatory, tactile, etc.), as well as cognitive ones (e.g., the phenomenology of thinking, moral phenomenology). A subject is also the bearer of a certain character, from which the various phenomenologies
stem or in which various fleeting phenomenologies can be implemented into more stable character traits. How is the conscious life of a subject, the technicolor phenomenology the subject enjoys at any moment in time, determined by the subject’s character? Do subjects with different characters enjoy different phenomenologies? Do subjects with similar characters enjoy similar phenomenologies? Is there a scale of similarities and differences in the overall phenomenologies
of conscious subjects that can be somehow quantified as a function of the subjects’ characters? How can fleeting phenomenologies (acquired, for instance, by empathy, or imagination, be it conceptual or non-conceptual) be implemented into more stable character traits?
In this talk, I shall sketch a theory (character terraformation) about the intricate relationship between phenomenologies and character traits, in both directions: i) from character traits to phenomenologies, and ii) from phenomenologies to character traits, with particular attention to (ii). The overall method of my approach will be analytic phenomenology, combining insights from phenomenology (as a method) and analytic philosophy.”
Marius Dumitru, nascut la Dragasani, in Oltenia, la 12 februarie
1982, scrie in principal pentru o teza de doctorat intitulata The
Phenomenology of Thought (Fenomenologia Gandirii), inceputa in 2007 la
Universitatea Oxford (colegiul Christ Church) si pentru o teza de
doctorat distincta intitulata Externalism and Phenomenal Experience
(Externalism si Experienta Fenomenala), inceputa in 2006 la
Universitatea din Paris (institutul Jean Nicod si Universitatea Paris
VI-Pierre si Marie Curie). Alte doua proiecte curente de cercetare
sunt unul pe filosofia caracterului si unul pe cercetari psi.
Inainte de a incepe aceste proiecte, a studiat filosofia la Bucuresti
intre 2000 si 2004 (media anilor de studii: 9.91, media la licenta:
9.87), apoi a fost admis pe baza unui examen foarte competitiv la
Ecole Normale Supérieure (rue d’Ulm) la Paris, intre 2004 si 2007,
unde a obtinut un master in stiinte cognitive la Ecole des Hautes
Etudes en Sciences Sociales (summa cum laude), un master in filosofie
la Universitatea Paris IV-Sorbona (summa cum laude) si a inceput
doctoratul de la Paris mentionat mai sus.
Marius a vizitat de-a lungul anilor mai multe institutii prestigioase
din toata lumea, cum ar fi Universitatea din New York (ianuarie-mai
2007), Australian National University (mai-septembrie 2008),
Universitatea din Oslo (iunie-iulie 2010) sau Universitatile din Viena
(mai 2002) si Salzburg (martie 2009). A lucrat si interactionat cu
filosofi contemporani importanti ai mintii si ai constientei precum
Ned Block (Universitatea din New York) si David Chalmers (Australian
National University si Universitatea din New York). De asemenea, a
sustinut conferinte si participat la scoli de vara (filosofie,
psihologie neurostiinte) la institutii din toata lumea, in Europa,
America de Nord, Australia si Asia. Dintre conferinte, mai importante
ar fi cele sustinute la Toward a Science of Consciousness in Tucson,
Arizona, in aprilie 2008 si la doua din intalnirile anuale ale
Asociatiei pentru Studiul Stiintific al Constientei (ASSC), la
Pasadena, California, in iunie 2005 si la Taipei, Taiwan, in iunie
2008. Dintre scolile de vara, mai importanta ar fi cea pe neurostiinte
de la RIKEN Brain Science Institute de la Wako-shi, langa Tokyo, in
iulie-august 2006.
In viitor, Marius doreste sa transforme tezele de doctorat in doua
carti si sa publice mai multe articole derivate din cercetarile lui in
cele mai prestigioase reviste din domeniul filosofiei mintii si a
constientei din lume. De asemenea, doreste sa isi diversifice agenda
de cercetare pentru a scrie despre diverse alte subiecte filosofice,
cat si din afara filosofiei.
Marius a predat logica la colegiul Somerville al Universitatii din
Oxford intre octombrie si decembrie 2008 si in primavara lui 2012
urmeaza sa colaboreze cu fundaţia privată Calea Victoriei din
Bucureşti sub forma de conferinte/curs, tratând teme precum metafizica
minţii şi a corpului, percepţia, gândirea, caracterul şi sinele. Este
de asemenea în discuţii cu diverse societati si universităţi din ţară
pentru a susţine conferinţe şi a ţine cursuri în cadrul lor. In
decembrie 2011 a vizitat in acest scop Universitatile din Galati si
Timisoara si este in discutii avansate cu Universitatea din Cluj
pentru o colaborare in a doua parte a anului academic 2011/2012.
de lavi | ian. 20, 2012 | Conferinte
Saptamana viitoare,
miercuri 25 ianuarie , seminarul departamentului de filosofie teoretica il are ca invitat pe
Markus Pantsar (University of Helsinki)
„Empirical Research and The Philosophy of Mathematics”.
ABSTRACT
In the philosophy of mathematics, one of the most fundamental questions concerns how mathematical methods help us get knowledge of the world. In this, mathematics with its apparent a priori character seems to be radically different from the empirical methods we otherwise rely on in science. This relation between the mathematical and the empirical has received extensive treatment from the likes of Quine, Putnam and Kitcher. In this talk, however, I want to focus on a different approach: what can we learn empirically about mathematical thinking and, in particular, what relevance does this have in philosophy?
For this purpose, I will present some examples of results from psychology, animal studies, sociology and the study of mathematical practice, and evaluate their philosophical importance. While such
results are often inconclusive or irrelevant, I will contend that there are numerous studies concerning primitive mathematical thinking that we should take seriously in philosophy. In addition, I will formulate the outlines of an epistemological theory that can retain the special character of mathematical knowledge while not making it empirically unfeasible.
.Seminarul are loc ca de obicei de la ora 18, la Facultatea de Filosofie, amfiteatrul Titu Maiorescu.
de lavi | dec. 18, 2011 | Anunturi, Conferinte
Laboratorul de cercetare Kant
Program:
Joi, 19 ianuarie:
16-17.30 – Ilie Pârvu, Unitatea teoretică a filosofiei transcedentale
17.30-19 – Valentin Mureșan, Funcția dublă a formulei legii naturii
Vineri, 20 ianuarie:
16-17.30 – Mircea Flonta, Filosofia teoretică și practică a lui Kant, pe marginea unei însemnări a lui Heinrich Heine
17.30-19 – Emilian Mihailov, Problema formulelor imperativului categoric și arhitectonica rațiunii practice
Argument
Kant promite în Critica rațiunii pure o revoluție în gândirea filosofică care este menită să centreze investigarea teoretică asupra condițiilor de posibilitate ale obiectelor experienței și ale voinței. Atât știința naturii cât și moralitatea se vor supune cotiturii metodologice a proiectului criticist. În Întemeierea metafizicii moravurilor, Kant ne avertizează că ”nu poate exista decât una și aceași rațiune care trebuie să fie diferențiată numai în aplicarea ei”.
Pe de o parte, cerința unei rațiuni unice ne impune să lucrăm cu un model unitar în ambele domenii de cercetare, dar pe de altă parte există asimetrii în funcție de natura obiectului cercetat, i.e. legi ale naturii sau legi ale libertății. Ceea ce ne propunem să facem este să abordăm problemele filosofiei morale și teoretice a lui Kant în cadrul unității rațiunii pure. Urmărim să așezăm problemele în cadrul cunoașterii a priori în genere, format din critică și metafizică ca tipuri de teoretizare.
Astfel, credem că unele soluțiile la problemele rațiunii speculative pot fi extrapolate la problemele rațiunii practice, și vice versa. În același timp, credem că unele soluții nu pot fi extrapolate, dar și acest fapt reprezintă un câștig la fel de important deoarece doar așa putem înțelege pe ce se bazează asimetriile aplicării rațiunii în domenii diferite. Uneori pentru a înțelege unitatea unei structuri teoretice este important să cercetăm și ce se află în afara ei.
(Lucrările din program pot fi găsite pe site-ul http://www.srfa.ro/new/laboratorul-de-cercetare-kant-19-20-ianuarie-2012 sau pot fi solicitate trimițând un mail la adresa emilian.mihailov@gmail.com )