The role of philosophy in LAS. How do I see the role of philosophy in LAS
Rafał Paweł WIERZCHOSŁAWSKI (PhD) is a philosopher. As a lecturer of LAS, he teaches classes "Knowledge in Context", "Theory of Science", "Responsibility and Leadership". We can ask a question: why should LAS students participate in philosophical subjects, and why methodological [meta-scientific] ones?
We understand the term philosophy in the sense of a definition formed by referring to the meanings of component words: philia and sophia translate into love for wisdom. Wisdom is sought not only by professional philosophers but also praised in various books of great religions, e.g. recall different biblical phrases. Also, poets directed the yearning gaze of their minds to wisdom, trying to find expression for it in elaborate metaphors: exegi monumentum aere perennius, seeing wisdom as an imperishable and lasting treasure. Wisdom, then, is something precious in itself. It is a Horatian bonum honestum, regardless of the potential benefits that its possession may bring. It consists of understanding the principles of the world (and not only), referring to an objective hierarchy of values, based on which we can understand and adjust our actions in a righteous way and achieve happiness (eudaimonia, vita beata).
Does knowledge lead to wisdom, or does it guarantee wisdom? Or perhaps wisdom in its ancient sense no longer exists. Maybe in the times of "Knowledge societies", what matters when it comes to knowledge is the ability to act as suggested by today's experts on the subject. Thus, it is not so much wisdom that is valued today as effectiveness in achieving practical goals (both individually and collectively). In the pandemic, we see that all the more clearly.
Therefore, we have a vision of wisdom as a path to a good and decent life. On the other side, we have effective action using scientific knowledge and its technological processing, which allows us to protect against natural threats, such as food shortage, diseases (including the current pandemic), and natural disasters. Knowledge is the key to power, as Francis Bacon proclaimed. Know to foresee, foresee to act - stated August Comte, prophet announcing the age of scientific reason in his scientistic "sermons". He hoped that in this new age, deficiencies of previous epochs are going to pass away.
In that scenario, scientific knowledge, for which physics was the model and measure, was supposed to replace earlier forms of cognition, like religious or philosophical cognition. Each of them had a role to play in due course, but their days are over. The time of scientific reason (embodied in the natural sciences) has come. These prophetic visions echo in the repeating calls to naturalize all that is knowable. In other words, the world of colours perishes only waves and spectres remain. Values and love cease to exist. Selfish genes, releases of dopamine and the impact of pheromones take their place. It is them to blame when we suddenly become interested in someone and, after some time, we decide to live a life together. Is there any place for philosophical reflection (understood as the quest for wisdom) left in this context? Do we have types of cognition other than scientific, which would also meet the criteria of rationality and, at the same time, would maintain their cognitive autonomy ?!
In the positivist view, science and technology, like half-naked Marianna, carrying a torch of education, are supposed to lead us to the barricades in the fight against old superstitions. That way, we're supposed to be relieved from serfdom and numerous limitations. The question is if such a vision still holds its credibility? Living in a society of risk (Beck) and fear (Furedi), we painfully confront the unexpected and unforeseen effects of scientific and technological progress. These effects turned into new sources of threat to humanity and new challenges for science and technology.
We can list many questions of that kind. The above remarks point out (in a lofty style) several problems relevant for teaching philosophy as a part of the Liberal Arts and Sciences program.
At first, I would like to point out that this is a highly subjective, not to say, authorial vision. Therefore, I understand that another instructor could place some accents or choose material differently.
1. Philosophy appears in the LAS program as a philosophy of science. In Polish tradition, this subject often comes down to the general methodology of sciences: parts of logical semiotics, history of science and the "proper" philosophy of science. Additionally, I also run a class on the history of science and the "Man and Civilization" seminar. They as well contain some elements of philosophy (in the broad sense of the word). We can treat them as compliments of the philosophy of the sciences. All three classes jointly make for a philosophical "package".
2. My students don't study philosophy. That fact is of great importance for defining the scope of the issues discussed and the manner of their transmission. Moreover, modus legendi (dicendi) is determined (or limited) by the conditions of distance learning. I assume that students may have limited access to books and materials and offer them digital copies whenever possible. In my view, it is essential for me that the students have contact with scientific texts, not just with a power-point presentation. I am aware that it may not be easy for them to get through the texts offered to them in their first year. I believe, however, that it is my duty as an instructor to put students in such a sink or swim situation. Therefore I try to put the text we read in context and explain their relation to other views and positions. I also introduce to them the "big names" of Polish and world philosophical literature. As a result, students get to know many different styles/types of philosophical thinking. In other words, the idea is to make students aware that we can look at each problem from different points of view, depending on the assumptions made. In a word, there is some truth to the saying cave ab homine unius libri. I would like them to favour a multi-faceted view, even at the cost of (temporary - I l) confusion.
3. Although we generally devote our attention to the phenomenon of science, we discuss issues related to science in a broader context of both philosophical assumptions in the external base of scientific theories as well as humanities and social sciences about science. We are interested not only in the structure of science (syntactic aspect) and the forms of its relation to the world (realism/instrumentalism) in the context of the category of truth - semantic aspect), but also in the broad context of various forms of using the fruits of scientific cognition (technology) and their application in everyday life.
4. Likewise, in the "Knowledge in Context" class, consider individual scientific disciplines that evolved from forms of cognition considered pre-scientific (colloquial, religious or philosophical). However, We are also interested in philosophical concepts of science (the notion of science) from different historical periods. For example, discussion on the unity of science (and the peculiarities of different types of sciences) presupposes decisions of a philosophical nature (naturalism / anti-naturalism, determinism/indeterminism, the subjectivity of actions at various social levels: micro-meso-macro, etc.).
5. It's not so easy to define the scope and content of a lecture on the philosophy of science, as our understanding of what constitutes a philosophical reflection on science changes over time. At first, we understood it as "scientific philosophy". Only such definition could make it acceptable for the spirit of logical positivism. Other branches of philosophy were, in its view, only remains of a delusional walk in the land of phantasy.
Today no one treats the project of Viennese positivism (or its variations) as the only acceptable form of science-related cognition. Contemporary philosophy of science often divides itself into the philosophies of various scientific disciplines and sometimes even concepts (key categories such as time, causality, interdisciplinarity). etc.). Contemporary voices, especially those coming from the humanities and social sciences about science, strongly downplay the meaning of the philosophy of science (in the old style). This situation contrasts drastically with past claims about its cognitive reach and methodological uniqueness.
6. Thus, the discussion of the philosophy of science must take into account both the criticism of the [positivist] rationality of science, understood as the adoption of the methodological pattern of natural sciences for all scientific disciplines (unity of sciences), not only within the philosophy of science itself but also on the part of social sciences about science. Of course, adopting such a perspective doesn't mean that We reduce the rationality of the justification context to the sociological or psychological context of discovery and economic and political-institutional conditions. It is more an attempt to balance proportions between cognitive claims made in the post-positivist model, whose supporters wanted to have a monopoly and exclusivity in determining what science is and what isn't (the famous question of demarcation).
7. Another important class with a philosophical component is the "Responsibility and Leadership" seminar. In this class, we present and discuss the fundamental controversies and dilemmas of the modern world. We take into account their historical background (genesis), various axiological and worldview (ideological) options or metaphysical assumptions, focusing on the dynamics of changes and the diversity of forms of occurrence (centres, peripheries, modifications resulting from different traditions and different development paths). Students don't just learn about controversies troubling our times. Their attention draws to a specific modus analysandi, which presents these issues from the meta-perspective. This modus goes beyond the accepted perspective (worldview or cultural tradition) and tries to understand(interpret) other positions in a sympathetic, noticing that the supporters of views opposite to ours may also have good arguments at hand. We can treat the ability to critically analyze different positions (rationality) as a continuation of the approaches of such eminent scientists as Kazimierz Ajdukiewicz, Stanisław Ossowski or Edmund Mokrzycki. It's not only a crucial academic skill but also an indispensable element of civic culture. That's because the requirement and need to rationally justify one's beliefs (including axiological options) relates to their kind interpretation by others (bona fide). This issue is getting more and more vital as the pluralization of our societies grows.
8. To summarize, philosophical subjects in such interdisciplinary studies as the LAS direction should at drawing students' attention to:
a. theoretical factor in scientific cognition, which integrates various types of cognition in individual scientific disciplines with which students become acquainted;
b. historical determinants of scientific rationality, which emerged in history from various types of human knowledge, at the same time with a balanced approach to science in the context of these;
c. axiological differentiation of contemporary culture and various forms of civilization, especially understanding the reasons underlying their origins and later existence, which does not mean giving up one's own beliefs and ideological options. Plus ratio quam vis, to recall the motto of the oldest Polish Alma Mater.
