Bachelard: l’objectivité scientifique d’un point de vue constructiviste, entre imagination et raison
Sammanfattning: In Sweden, Bachelard is mostly known for his works about poetry and literature, but he was also very productive in philosophy of science. Having studied engineering and taught physical sciences, his main writings in this field concern contemporary physics. He developed the idea of “epistemological rupture”, closely linked to the concept of “epistemological obstacle”. Those notions show science in its historicity and are linked to the idea of progress: a progress that strives not only towards a better approximation of reality, but that can also be seen as a progress of the scientific mind itself. Epistemological ruptures take place when epistemological obstacles are defeated. It is when an epistemological obstacle is met that the ways of thinking that prevents progress become visible; it needs to become an obstacle before we can get rid of it, which causes not only a more precise knowledge, but also a restructuration of the scientific mind. This way, epistemological rupture do not only refer to a historical process, but also to a psychological one. In The formation of the scientific mind, Bachelard shows, through examples taken from history of science, the path that each “scientific mind” has to travel. He analyses science with the aim of finding in its history a history of thought and of its progress: therefore, in The formation of the scientific mind, he gives the same status to the errors of the high school students, as to the ways of thinking that have impeded or slowed down sciences’ developments. By stressing the importance of history, Bachelard insists on the psychological aspects of the constitution of science: as much as it is absurd to try to understand an answer without knowing the question it replies to, it is not possible to cut knowledge from its context of emergence, or to understand an object of study without referring to the subject that constituted it. Thus, Bachelard emphasises the importance of the subject in science, but without making of science something subjective, or without falling into psychologism. The reference to the scientists’ subjectivity is not, for Bachelard, a way of questioning the validity of the scientific discourse; on the contrary, it is by describing science in terms of the scientist’s mind and psychology that Bachelard will find the grounds for science’s objectivity and its success. Bachelard shows science as a practice, as a training of the mind, as an effort involving a lot more than mere rationality, thereby destroying the myth of a universal reason as an underlying principle in the construction of science.
HÄR KAN DU HÄMTA UPPSATSEN I FULLTEXT. (följ länken till nästa sida)