Advertisement

Science & Education

, Volume 4, Issue 2, pp 115–126 | Cite as

Hermeneutics and Science Education: The role of history of science

  • Fabio Bevilacqua
  • Enrico Giannetto
Article

Abstract

Eger's contribution towards a reapprochment of Hermeneutics, Science and Science Education is very welcome. His focus on the problem of misconceptions is relevant. All the same in our opinion some not minor points need a clarification. We will try to argue that: a) Hermeneutics cannot be reduced to a semantical interpretation of science texts; its phenomenological aspects have to be taken in account. b) Science has an unavoidable historical dimension; original papers and advanced textbooks are the real depositaries of scientific research. Standard textbooks are a caricature not worth it of a hermeneutical analysis. c) A parallelism can be traced between two dicothomies: the lifeworld of hermeneutics and the scienceworld of epistemology on one side and the extraordinary and the normal science on the other. d) For an overcoming of the misconceptions' problem we propose that the previous dicothomies be bridged through a hermeneutical phenomenological approach to science education that stresses the alternative, historical interpretations of natural phenomena.

Keywords

Science Education Natural Phenomenon Phenomenological Approach Semantical Interpretation Normal Science 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Apel, K.O.: 1973, 1976, Transformation der Philosophie, Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am Main.Google Scholar
  2. Apel, K.O.: (in press), History of Science as a Problem of Hermeneutics. An Argument with Karl Popper's “Third-World”-Hermeneutics, Proceedings of the “Conference on Science and Hermeneutics” (Veszprém 1993), O. Kiss & L. Ropolyi (eds.), Reidel, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  3. Blumenberg, H.: 1960, Paradigmen zu einer Metaphorologie, Bonn.Google Scholar
  4. Blumenberg, H.: 1981, Die Lesbarkeit der Welt, Suhrkamp, Frankfurt am Main.Google Scholar
  5. Boyd, R.: 1979, ‘Metaphor and Theory Change: What is “Metaphor” and Metaphor for?’, in Metaphor and Thought, A. Ortony (ed.), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  6. Buchdahl, G.: 1992, Kant and the Dynamics of Reason, Blackwell, Oxford.Google Scholar
  7. Buchdahl, G.: 1993, Science & Education 2, 149–167.Google Scholar
  8. Eger, M.: 1993, Science & Education 1, 337–348; 1993, Science & Education 2, 1–29 and 303–328.Google Scholar
  9. Gadamer, H.G.: 1960, 1965, Wahrheit und Methode, Mohr, Tübingen.Google Scholar
  10. Giannetto, E.: (in press), Heidegger and the Question of Physics, Proceedings of the “Conference on Science and Hermeneutics” (Veszprém 1993), O. Kiss & L. Ropolyi (eds), Reidel, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  11. Giannetto, E., Tarsitani, C. & Vicentini, M.: 1992, ‘The Relations between Epistemology, History of Science and Science Teaching from the Point of View of the Research on Mental Representations’, in The History and Philosophy of Science in Science Education, S. Hill (ed.), University of Kingston, Kingston, 359–374.Google Scholar
  12. Heidegger, M.: 1927, Sein und Zeit, Niemeyer, Tübingen.Google Scholar
  13. Heidegger, M.: 1954, ‘Die Frage nach der Technik’, in Vorträge und Aufsätze, Neske, Pfullingen.Google Scholar
  14. Heidegger, M.: 1959, Unterwegs zur Sprache, Neske, Pfullingen.Google Scholar
  15. Husserl, E.: 1954, 1959, Die Krisis der europäischen Wissenschaften und die transzendentale Phänomenologie, in Husserliana, Gesammelte Werke 6, Nijhoff, The Hague.Google Scholar
  16. Kuhn, T.S.: 1979, ‘Metaphor in Science’, in Metaphor and Thought, A. Ortony (ed.), Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  17. Matthews, M.: 1994, History, Philosophy and Science Teaching: A Useful Alliance, Routledge, New York.Google Scholar
  18. Olby, R.C., Cantor, G.N., Christie, J.R.R. & Hodge M.J.S. (eds.): 1990, Companion to the History of Modern Science, Routledge, London.Google Scholar
  19. Poincaré, H.: 1902, La science et l'hypothèse, Flammarion, Paris.Google Scholar
  20. Poincaré, H.: 1905, La valeur de la science, Flammarion, Paris.Google Scholar
  21. Rorty, R. (ed.): 1967, The Linguistic Turn, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
  22. Rorty, R.: 1991, ‘Is Natural Science a Natural Kind?’, in Objectivity, Relativism and Truth. Philosophical Papers I, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 46–62.Google Scholar
  23. Rorty, R.: 1979, Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature, Princeton University Press, Princeton.Google Scholar
  24. Russell, B.: 1914, Our Knowledge of the External World, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  25. Secord, J.A. (guest ed.): 1993, The Big Picture, a special issue of the British Journal for the History of Science 26(91).Google Scholar
  26. Whitehead, A.N.: 1920, The Concept of Nature, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  27. Wittgenstein, L.: 1922, Logisch-philosophische Abhandlung. Tractatus logico-philosophicus, with an introduction by B. Russell, Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner and Co., London.Google Scholar
  28. Wittgenstein, L.: 1953, Philosophische Untersuchungen. (Philosophical Investigations), Blackwell, Oxford.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • Fabio Bevilacqua
    • 1
    • 2
  • Enrico Giannetto
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Dipartimento di Fisica “A. Volta”Università di PaviaPaviaItaly
  2. 2.GNSF/CNR, sezione di PaviaItaly

Personalised recommendations