Metafore, modelli, linguaggio scientifico: il dibattito postempirista

In Virgilio Melchiorre (ed.), Simbolo e conoscenza. Milano: Vita e Pensiero. pp. 31-102 (1988)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

I discuss Mary Hess’s interaction-view of scientific metaphor, outline an alternative view and show how it may prove fruitful when applied to chapters of the history of science. I start with a reconstruction of the discussion on the nature of scientific models and on their relationship to metaphors that has taken place in the Anglo-Saxon philosophy of Science starting from the Fifties; the discovery started with Stephen Pepper and Kenneth Burke, reaching Thomas Kuhn, Marx Wartofsky, and George Lakoff via Max Black's and Mary Hesse's interaction view. I argue that Hesse's view has a number of weak points: uncritically accepting Black's idea of "interaction", for keeping too much of a logical empiricist view of observation language, and for keeping too much of a Scholastic distinction between formal and material analogy. I argue that a few insights from Kuhn and Wartofsky seem to go in the same direction as Granger's view of metaphor as opposed to metonymy, thus severing the link between metaphor and the "qualitative". I argue that the Cartesian legacy and its implicit ideal of a "mirroring" relationship between the world and the mind is the main obstacle to be eventually overcome if we are to work out a satisfactory account of the language of science and that suggestions from pragmatism as well as from French epistemology may be used in order to work out a post-Cartesian view of science.

Author's Profile

Sergio Volodia Marcello Cremaschi
UniversitĂ  Cattolica di Milano (PhD)

Analytics

Added to PP
2019-12-26

Downloads
308 (#48,830)

6 months
42 (#79,809)

Historical graph of downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.
How can I increase my downloads?