Scientific realism, ontology and mysticism

The problem posed by Olga Stoliarova in her article is particularly relevant in the context of a heightened confrontation between the supporters of "scientific realism" and those who criticize the naive or metaphysical realism and contrasts it with socio-constructivist and socio-epistemological approaches. A justification of the autonomy of historical ontology, its "parallelism" with historical epistemology is designed to give arguments in favor of the priority and self-worth of "ontological intuitions". And here historical ontologism finds itself facing the already known issue of incomprehensibility of reality in itself, and the inability to talk about reality outside a definite - either scientific or non-scientific - language. Scientific language is the language of various kinds of theories: all terms acquire meanings through involvement in some conceptual system. The difference between theories gives rise to the problem of conceptual incommensurability, which can hardly be resolved by appealing to ontological intuitions of a non-scientific character. Indeed, in this case historical ontology in search of a justification for the unity of scientific knowledge goes far beyond the latter and replaces "conceptual irrationalism" by a mystical faith in the transcendent. And it is not the result that would satisfy scientific realists or the proponents of Bruno Latour who inspired the "ontological turn".

Keywords

Authors

References