Advertisement

Philosophy of science in Estonia

  • Rein Vihalemm
  • Peeter Müürsepp
Report

Abstract

This paper presents a survey of the philosophy of science in Estonia. Topics covered include the historical background (science at the 17th century Academia Gustaviana, in the 19th century, during the Soviet period) and an overview of the current situation and main areas of research (the problem of demarcation, a critique of the traditional understandings of science, φ-science, classical and non-classical science, the philosophy of chemistry, the problem of induction, the sociology of scientific knowledge, semiotics as a methodology).

Keywords

Philosophy of science in Estonia ‘Foreword Marxism’ φ-science Classical and non-classical science The problem of induction Sociology of scientific knowledge Semiotics 

References

  1. Aaviksoo J. (2003) Estonian R&D policy—still to be defined. Trames: Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences 7(1): 32–39Google Scholar
  2. Audi R. (eds) (1995) The Cambridge dictionary of philosophy. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  3. Baer, K. E. v. (1864). Welche Auffassung der lebenden Natur ist die richtige? Und wie ist diese Auffassung auf die Entomologie anzuwenden? Reden, Bd. 1 (pp. 237–284). St. Petersburg: H. Schmitzdorff.Google Scholar
  4. Blum, R.N., Kulli, N.F., & Pavilyonis, R.I. (1982). The actual problems of the social determination of cognition. Filosofskie nauki, 4, 155–156[in Russian].Google Scholar
  5. Bunge, G. v. (1887). Vitalismus und Mechanismus. [A foreword to:] G. Bunge, Lehrbuch der physiologischen und pathologischen Chemie (pp. 3–15). Leipzig: F.C.W.Wogel.Google Scholar
  6. Charpa, U. (Ed.) (1989). Matthias Jakob Schleiden, Wissenschaftsphilosophische Schriften mit kommentierenden Texten von Jakob Friedrich Fries, Christian G. Nees von Esenbeck und Gert Buchdahl. Köln: Dinter.Google Scholar
  7. Charpa U. (2003) Matthias Jacob Schleiden (1804-1881): The history of Jewish interest in science and the methodology of microscopic botany. Aleph: Historical Studies in Science and Judaism 3: 213–245CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Charpa, U. (2004). Matthias Jacob Schleiden. In Th. Bach & O. Breidbach (Eds.), Naturphilosophie nach Schelling (pp. 627–653). Stuttgart, Bad Cannstatt: Frommann-Holzboog.Google Scholar
  9. Chernov, I. (1988). Historical survey of Tartu-Moscow Semiotic school. In H. Broms & R. Kaufmann (Eds.), Semiotics of culture: Proceedings of the 25th symposium of the Tartu-Moscow school of semiotics, Imatra, Finland, 27th–29th July, 1987 (pp. 7–16). Helsinki: Arator.Google Scholar
  10. Eintalu, J. (1994a). About undecided games. Studia Philosophica, 3(39), 153–178 [in Estonian].Google Scholar
  11. Eintalu, J. (1994b). Outsolutions in physical theories. In R. Vihalemm et al. (Eds.), Philosophy and methodology of science in Estonia: The present state and prospects. Teaduslugu ja nüüdisaeg IX (pp. 205–218). Tallinn: EUHPS and Department of Philosophy of the University of Tartu.Google Scholar
  12. Eintalu J. (2000) Even if (Even if Popper solved the problem of induction, Popperians still cannot be rational agents). Trames: Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences 4(2): 186–208Google Scholar
  13. Eintalu, J. (2001a). Outsolutions in physical theories: Physical considerations. In R. Vihalemm (Ed.), Estonian studies in the history and philosophy of science. (Boston studies in the philosophy of science. Vol. 219) (pp. 215–230). Dordrecht, Boston, London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  14. Eintalu, J. (2001b). The problem of induction: The presuppositions revisited. (Dissertationes philosophicae Universitatis Tartuensis 1). Tartu: Tartu University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Eintalu, J. (2006). Descartes, Wittgenstein, and uncertainty. In M. Rahnfeld (Ed.), Gibt es sichere Wissen?: Aktuelle Beiträge zur Erkenntnistheorie. (Grundlagenprobleme unserer Zeit, Band 5) (pp. 24–43). Leipzig: Leipziger Universitätsverlag.Google Scholar
  16. Engelbrecht, J. (2001). Science and society—faculties close or apart? In R. Vihalemm (Ed.), Estonian studies in the history and philosophy of science. (Boston studies in the philosophy of science. Vol. 219) (pp. 77–88). Dordrecht, Boston, London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  17. Gasparov B.M. (1989) The Tartu school in the 1960s as a semiotic phenomenon. Wiener Slavistischer Almanach 23: 7–21 [in Russian].Google Scholar
  18. Gould S.J. (1977) Ontogeny and phylogeny. The Belknap Press, Cambridge (MA.)Google Scholar
  19. Graham L.R. (1987) Science, philosophy, and human behavior in the Soviet Union. Columbia University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  20. Grauberg E. (1974) Logical theory of epistemic modalities and the problem of knowledge and opinion. Voprosy filosofii 6: 129–133 [in Russian].Google Scholar
  21. Gräzin I. (1983) The text of law. An attempt of a methodological analysis of competitive theories. Eesti Raamat, Tallinn [in Russian].Google Scholar
  22. Gräzin I. (1995) A few words about Andrus Park. Proceedings of the Estonian Academy of Sciences. Humanities and Social Sciences 44(3): 213–214Google Scholar
  23. Gräzin I. (1999) Anglo-American philosophy of law, An overview, 2nd edn., extended. Sihtasutus Iuridicum, Tartu [in Estonian].Google Scholar
  24. Hallap, T. (2004). Science communication and science policy: Estonian media discourse on the genetic database project. In M. Sutrop (Ed.), Special issue “Human genetic databases: ethical, legal and social issues”. Trames: Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences, 8(1/2), 217–240.Google Scholar
  25. Hartmann N. (1912) Philosophische Grundfragen der Biologie. Vanderhoek & Ruprecht, GöttingenGoogle Scholar
  26. Hütt, V. (1965). The absolute and the relative in the interpretation of quantum mechanics (Tartu Ü.likooli toimetised, 174. Töid filosoofia alalt, 9). Tartu: Tartu University Press [a monograph in Russian].Google Scholar
  27. Hütt V. (1967) The complementarity of N. Bohr and its methodological meaning. In: Omelyanovsky M.E. (eds). Logic and methodology of science. Nauka, Moscow, pp. 257–263 [in Russian].Google Scholar
  28. Hütt V. (1975) Parmenides and physics. Filosofskiye nauki 6: 68–74 [in Russian].Google Scholar
  29. Hütt V. (1976) The conception of complementarity in the interpretation of quantum mechanics. In: Bazhenov L.B. (eds). The principle of complementarity and materialist dialectics. Nauka, Moscow, pp. 138–158 [in Russian].Google Scholar
  30. Hütt V. (1977) The conception of complementarity and the problem of the objectivity of physical knowledge. Valgus, Tallinn [in Russian].Google Scholar
  31. Hütt V. (1979) Philosophical problems of physics in Soviet Estonia in 30 years: 1948–1978. Academy of Sciences of the ESSR, Tallinn [in Russian].Google Scholar
  32. Hütt V., Kard P. (1974) The role of activity of the subject in the objectivation of physical knowledge. Voprosy filosofii 6: 76–82 [in Russian].Google Scholar
  33. Jahn, I., & Schmidt, I. (2005). Matthias Jacob Schleiden (1804–1881): Sein Leben in Selbstzeugnissen. Acta Historica Leopoldina, Vol. 44. Stuttgart: Wissenschaftliche Verlagsgesellschaft.Google Scholar
  34. Järve P. (1985) Model based explanation in psychology: The problem of genesis. Proceedings of the Estonian Academy of Sciences. Social Sciences 34(2): 154–164 [in Russian].Google Scholar
  35. Jäsche G.B. (eds) (1800) Immanuel Kants Logik. Ein Handbuch zu Vorlesungen. Friedrich Nicolovius, KönigsbergGoogle Scholar
  36. Jäsche G.B. (1816) Einleitung zu einer Architektonik der Wissenschaften. J. C. Schünmann, DorpatGoogle Scholar
  37. Kaevats Ü., Keskpaik A. (1984) The notion of model in the methodology of science. Proceedings of the Estonian Academy of Sciences. Social Sciences 33(1): 47–52 [in Russian].Google Scholar
  38. Kaevats Ü. (1975) On constructing logico-mathematical models of physical theories. In: Valt L., Hütt V. (eds). The method of modelling and some problems of the history and methodology of natural science. Academy of Sciences of the Estonian SSR, Tallinn, pp. 87–96 [in Russian].Google Scholar
  39. Kaevats Ü. (1979) Cooperation of the conceptual and visual in a physical theory. Proceedings of the Estonian Academy of Sciences. Social Sciences 28(4): 128–142 [in Russian].Google Scholar
  40. Kard P. (1952) About the theory of relativity. Voprosy filosofii 5: 240–247 [in Russian].Google Scholar
  41. Kasak E. (2000) Ancient astrology as a common root for science and pseudoscience. Folklore 15: 84–104Google Scholar
  42. Kasak E. (2001) Some remarks about understanding planets in Ancient Mesopotamia. Folklore 16: 7–33Google Scholar
  43. Kasak E. (2003) Ancient star lore and astronomy. Argo, Tallinn [in Estonian].Google Scholar
  44. Keskpaik A. (1985) On the explanatory function of the imitational models in ecology. Proceedings of the Estonian Academy of Sciences. Social Sciences 34(2): 180–208 [in Russian].Google Scholar
  45. Kirch M., Kirch A. (1995) Andrus Park as a theoretician of Estonian ethnopolitics. Proceedings of the Estonian Academy of Sciences. Humanities and Social Sciences 44(3): 207–212Google Scholar
  46. Kivistik, J. (2001). On the raising of a hand. In R. Vihalemm (Ed.), Estonian studies in the history and philosophy of science. (Boston studies in the philosophy of science. Vol. 219) (pp. 295–304). Dordrecht, Boston, London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  47. Kõiv, M., & Kuusk, P. (2001). What is time? In R. Vihalemm (Ed.), Estonian studies in the history and philosophy of science. (Boston studies in the philosophy of science. Vol. 219) (pp. 231–246). Dordrecht, Boston, London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  48. Koort A. (1938) Beiträge zur Logik des Typusbegriffs. K. Mattiesen, TartuGoogle Scholar
  49. Kotov, K., & Kull, K. (2006). Semiosphere versus Biosphere. In K. Brown (Ed.), Encyclopedia of language and linguistics (2nd ed., Vol. 11, pp. 194–198). Oxford: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  50. Kull, K., Salupere, S., & Torop, P. (2005). Semiotics has no beginning. [A foreword to:] J. Deely. Basics of Semiotics. Semiootika alused (pp. ix–xxv). Tartu: Tartu University Press.Google Scholar
  51. Kull K. (1999) Biosemiotics in the twentieth century: A view from biology. Semiotica 127(1/4): 385–414Google Scholar
  52. Kull K. (2000) Trends in theoretical biology: The 20th century. Aquinas 43(2): 235–249Google Scholar
  53. Kull K. (2001a) Jakob von Uexküll: An introduction. Semiotica 134(1/4): 1–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Kull K. (2001b) Living forms are communicative structures. Based on the organic codes. Cybernetics and Human Knowing 8(3): 91–94Google Scholar
  55. Kull K. (2003) Ladder, tree, web: The ages of biological understanding. Sign Systems Studies 31(2): 589–603Google Scholar
  56. Kulu, H. (2001). Knowledge, human interests and migration studies. In R. Vihalemm (Ed.), Estonian studies in the history and philosophy of science. (Boston studies in the philosophy of science. Vol. 219) (pp. 265–270). Dordrecht, Boston, London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  57. Kurs, O., & Tammiksaar, E. (2001). In political draughts between science and the humanities: Geography at the University of Tartu between the 17th – 20th centuries. In R. Vihalemm (Ed.), Estonian studies in the history and philosophy of science. (Boston studies in the philosophy of science. Vol. 219) (pp. 51–62). Dordrecht, Boston, London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  58. Kuusk, P. (2001). Physical reality, theoretical physics, and mathematics. In R. Vihalemm (Ed.), Estonian studies in the history and philosophy of science. (Boston studies in the philosophy of science. Vol. 219) (pp. 203–214). Dordrecht, Boston, London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  59. Lagerspetz, M., & Pettai, I. (2003). Estonian sociology of the 1990s: In search of an identity. In M. Keen, & J. Mucha (Eds.), Sociology in Central and Eastern Europe: Transformation at the dawn of a new millennium (pp. 61–72). Westport: CT & London: Praeger.Google Scholar
  60. Lõhkivi, E. (1995). Is scientific realism too optimistic? Studia Philosophica, II(38), 19–34.Google Scholar
  61. Lõhkivi E. (1998) Pursuing consistency in relativist sociology of scientific knowledge. Trames: Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences 2(52/47) 4: 299–330Google Scholar
  62. Lõhkivi, E. (2001a). Changes in the image of science after the social turn. In A. Kull (Ed.). The human being at the intersection of science, religion, and medicine (pp. 86–93), (Proceedings of the International Colloquium Tartu, 4–5 May 2001). Tartu: Tartu University Press.Google Scholar
  63. Lõhkivi, E. (2001b). Hermann Boerhaave—Communis Europae praeceptor: Internal vs. external in the history of science. R. Vihalemm (Ed.), Estonian studies in the history and philosophy of science. (Boston studies in the philosophy of science. Vol. 219) (pp. 139–150). Dordrecht, Boston, London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  64. Lõhkivi, E. (2001c). Reconciling realism and relativism: a study of epistemological assumptions in relativist sociology of scientific knowledge. Göteborg: Insitutionen för idéhistoria och vetenskapsteori, Göteborgs Universitet, Rapport nr. 202.Google Scholar
  65. Lõhkivi, E. (2002a). The ‘Science Wars’ and the Duhem-Quine argument of underdetermination. Trames: Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences, 6(56/51), 2, 141–172.Google Scholar
  66. Lõhkivi, E. (2002b). The sociology of scientific knowledge: A philosophical perspective. (Dissertationes Philosophicae Universitatis Tartuensis 3). Tartu: Tartu University Press.Google Scholar
  67. Lõhkivi, E. (2003). On philosophers’ criticism of the sociology of scientific knowledge. Paper presented at the Research Seminar of the Department of Philosophy, the University of Helsinki, Retrieved from http://www.helsinki.fi/filosofia/tutkijaseminaari/Lohkivi.pdf Accessed 24 April 2003.Google Scholar
  68. Lõhkivi, E. (2004). What models can do: A study of the use of the concept of model in biosensor research. In R. Vihalemm et al. (Eds.), Special issue “Proceedings of the 7th Summer Symposium of the International Society for the Philosophy of Chemistry (Tartu, 16–20 August, 2003)” (pp. 53–68). Studia Philosophica, IV(40). Tartu: Tartu University Press.Google Scholar
  69. Loit T. (1969) Philosophy and ideology in contemporary evolutionism. Eesti Raamat, Tallinn [in Estonian].Google Scholar
  70. Loit T. (1974) Theoretical biology as a metatheory of biological science. Voprosy filosofii 6: 83–89 [in Russian].Google Scholar
  71. Loit T. (1978) The problem of theoretical biology and the unity of science. Filosofskiye nauki 3: 23–30 [in Russian].Google Scholar
  72. Loone E. (1974) Formation and development of the analytical philosophy of history. Voprosy filosofii 6: 122–128 [in Russian].Google Scholar
  73. Loone E. (1975) The problem of historical explanation. Filosofskiye nauki 6: 27–32 [in Russian].Google Scholar
  74. Loone E. (1980) Contemporary philosophy of history. Eesti Raamat, Tallinn [in Russian].Google Scholar
  75. Loone, E. (1982). The autonomy of history. Czlowieck i Światopoglad, 1/2, 120–126 [in Polish].Google Scholar
  76. Loone E. (1983) The antinomies of self-consciousness in contemporary bourgeois philosophy of history. Voprosy filosofii 3: 127–133 [in Russian].Google Scholar
  77. Loone E. (1992) Soviet Marxism and analytical philosophies of history. Verso, London New YorkGoogle Scholar
  78. Loone E. (1993a) Estonian philosophy on the boundary between East and West. Studia Philosophica I(37): 129–155 [in Estonian].Google Scholar
  79. Loone, E. (1993b). Between West and East: The case of philosophy in Estonia. In K. Siilivask (Ed.), 17th Baltic Conference on History of Science: Baltic science between the West and the East (pp. 18–20). Tartu: Tartu University Press.Google Scholar
  80. Lotman J.M. (2003) On the metalanguage of a typological description of culture. In: Gottdiener M., Boklund-Lagopoulou K., Lagopoulos A.Ph. (eds). Semiotics, vol. 3. SAGE Publications, London, pp. 101–125 [Republication of 1975].Google Scholar
  81. Lotman J. (1990). Universe of the mind: A semiotic theory of culture. (Translated by Ann Shukman, introduction by Umberto Eco.) London & New York: I. B. Tauris.Google Scholar
  82. Lotman M. (2000) A few notes on the philosophical background of the Tartu School of semiotics. European Journal for Semiotic Studies 12(1): 23–46Google Scholar
  83. Lumiste Ü., Piirimäe H. (2001) Newton’s Principia in the curricula of the University of Tartu (Dorpat) in the early 1690-s. In: Vihalemm R. (eds) Estonian studies in the history and philosophy of science. (Boston studies in the philosophy of science. Vol. 219). Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, Boston, London, pp. 3–18Google Scholar
  84. Luts M. (1997) An introduction to the philosophy of law: A textbook for the students of the University of Tartu. Juura, Tallinn [in Estonian].Google Scholar
  85. Luure, A., & Müürsepp, P. (Eds.). (1998). Philosophy of science. (Acta Universitatis Scientiarum Socialum et Artis Educandi Tallinensis. Humaniora A8). Tallinn: TPÜ. [in Estonian].Google Scholar
  86. Mamchur Ye.A. (1987) The sociocultural determination of scientific cognition (Discussions in the post-positivist philosophy of science). Voprosy filosofii 7: 31–41 [in Russian].Google Scholar
  87. Mandelker A. (1994) Semiotizing the sphere: Organicist theory in Lotman, Bakhtin, and Vernadsky. Publications of the Modern Language Association 109(3): 385–396Google Scholar
  88. Martinson, H. (2001). Formation of R&D policy in a small country in a changing world. In R. Vihalemm (Ed.), Estonian studies in the history and philosophy of science. (Boston studies in the philosophy of science. Vol. 219) (pp. 63–76). Dordrecht, Boston, London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  89. Matjus, Ü. (2001). Edmund Husserl pursuing the paths of Descartes: The Paris Lectures on philosophy as a universal science. In R. Vihalemm (Ed.), Estonian studies in the history and philosophy of science. (Boston studies in the philosophy of science. Vol. 219) (pp. 123–138). Dordrecht, Boston, London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  90. Maxwell N. (1984) From knowledge to wisdom: A revolution in the aims and methods of science. Basil Blackwell, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  91. Mereste U., Nõmmik S. (1984a) The conception of social-economic geography. In: Nõmmik S. et al. (eds). Problem of territorial organisation of geographical systems. Tartu University Press, Tartu, pp. 3–18Google Scholar
  92. Mereste U., Nõmmik S. (1984b) Contemporary geography: questions of theory. Mysl, Moscow [in Russian].Google Scholar
  93. Mesimaa E. (1990) The problem of complexity and synergetics: A philosophico-methodological analysis. Tallinn Technical University, Tallinn [in Russian].Google Scholar
  94. Mölder, B. (2001). Inter-level explanation and the category-mistake. In R. Vihalemm (Ed.), Estonian studies in the history and philosophy of science. (Boston studies in the philosophy of science. Vol. 219) (pp. 283–294). Dordrecht, Boston, London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  95. Müürsepp P. (1991) Some methodological problems of the applications of catastrophe theory. Proceedings of the Estonian Academy of Sciences. Social Sciences 40(4): 356–363Google Scholar
  96. Müürsepp, P. (1998). Semiophysics as contemporary natural philosophy. In A. Luure & P. Müürsepp (Eds.), Philosophy of science. (Acta Universitatis Scientiarum Socialum et Artis Educandi Tallinensis. Humaniora A8) (pp. 68–75). Tallinn: TPÜ [In Estonian].Google Scholar
  97. Müürsepp, P. (2001). Science and magic: Causality. In R. Vihalemm (Ed.), Estonian studies in the history and philosophy of science. (Boston studies in the philosophy of science. Vol. 219) (pp. 165–178). Dordrecht, Boston, London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  98. Müürsepp, P. (2002). Aristotle as the first topologist. In E. Neuenschwander & L. Bouquiaux (Eds.), Science, philosophy and music. Proceedings of the XX-th International Congress of History of Science (Liege, 20-26 July 1997), vol. XX (pp. 45–56).Turnhout, Belgium: Brepols Publishers.Google Scholar
  99. Müürsepp P. (2003) The need for Aristotle in contemporary science. Problemos 64: 111–123Google Scholar
  100. Müürsepp, P. (2004). Chemistry as an independent science. In R. Vihalemm et al. (Eds.), Special issue “Proceedings of the 7th Summer Symposium of the International Society for the Philosophy of Chemistry (Tartu, 16–20 August, 2003)” (pp. 131–138). Studia Philosophica, IV(40). Tartu: Tartu University Press.Google Scholar
  101. Müürsepp P. (2005) The arrow of time: From Boltzmann to Prigogine. Proceedings of Audentes University 7: 207–215Google Scholar
  102. Naan G. (1948) Contemporary ‘physical’ idealism in the USA and England at the service of clergy and reaction. Voprosy filosofii 2: 287–308 [in Russian].Google Scholar
  103. Naan G. (1951) On the question of the principle of relativity in physics. Voprosy filosofii 2: 57–77Google Scholar
  104. Naan, G. (1958). On the contemporary status of the cosmological science. Voprosy kosmologii, 6, Moscow: AN SSSR, 277–329 [in Russian].Google Scholar
  105. Naan G. (1961) On the infinity of the universe. Voprosy filosofii 6: 93–106 [in Russian].Google Scholar
  106. Naan G. (1965) On the problem of infinity. Voprosy filosofii 12: 58–69 [in Russian].Google Scholar
  107. Naan G. (1967) The types of infinity. In: Frankfurt U.I. (eds). Einshteinovsky sbornik. Nauka, Moscow, pp. 287–307 [in Russian].Google Scholar
  108. Näpinen L., Müürsepp P. (2002) The concept of chaos in contemporary science: On Jean Bricmont’s critique of Ilya Prigogine’s ideas. Foundations of Science 7(4): 465–479CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. Näpinen L. (1982) On the notions of organisation and self-organisation in contemporary natural science. Proceedings of the Estonian Academy of Sciences. Social Sciences 31(1): 90–98 [in Russian].Google Scholar
  110. Näpinen L. (1990) On the assumptions of progress in society in light of the principles of synergetics. Proceedings of the Estonian Academy of Sciences. Social Sciences 39(3): 128–142 [in Russian].Google Scholar
  111. Näpinen, L. (2001). The problem of the relationship between human and physical realities in Ilya Prigogine’s paradigm of self-organisation. In R. Vihalemm (Ed.), Estonian studies in the history and philosophy of science. (Boston studies in the philosophy of science. Vol. 219) (pp. 151–164). Dordrecht, Boston, London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  112. Näpinen, L. (2002). Ilya Prigogine’s program for the remaking of traditional physics and the resulting conclusions for understanding social problems. Trames: Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences, 6(56/51), 2, 115–140.Google Scholar
  113. Näpinen L. (2004a) Exact sciences and the problem of integral understanding of the social reality. Problemos 65: 32–41Google Scholar
  114. Näpinen, L. (2004b). Understanding of the world and the scientific paradigm of self-organization. In R. Vihalemm et al. (Eds.), Special issue “Proceedings of the 7th Summer Symposium of the International Society for the Philosophy of Chemistry (Tartu, 16-20 August, 2003)” (pp. 156–157). Studia Philosophica, IV(40). Tartu: Tartu University Press.Google Scholar
  115. Narits R. (1997) Methodology of law. Juura, Tallinn [in Estonian].Google Scholar
  116. Oldekop, E. (1930). Über das hierarchische Prinzip in der Natur und seine Beziehungen zum Mechanismus-Vitalismus-Problem. Reval: F. Wassermann.Google Scholar
  117. Oldekop, E. (1933). Le principle de hierarchie dans la nature et ses rapports avec le probleme du vitalisme et du mecanisme. (Trad.: M. Nicolas.) Paris: J. Vrin.Google Scholar
  118. Ostwald, W. (1927). Lebenslinien. Eine Selbstbiographie. Zweiter Teil. Berlin: Klasing u. Co.Google Scholar
  119. Palge, V. (1994). On MacTaggart’s paradox of time and its interpretations. In R. Vihalemm et al. (Eds.), Philosophy and methodology of science in Estonia: The present state and prospects. Teaduslugu ja nüüdisaeg IX (pp. 194–204). Tallinn: EUHPS and Department of Philosophy of the University of Tartu [in Estonian].Google Scholar
  120. Palge V. (2002) The concept of becoming in quantum mechanics. In: Hogrebe W. (eds). Grenzen und Grenzüberschreitungen. 19. Deutscher Kongress für Philosophie. Sinclair Press, Bonn, pp. 625–632Google Scholar
  121. Palm V.A. (1977) Foundations of quantitative theory of organic reactions (2nd ed). Khimia, Leningrad [in Russian].Google Scholar
  122. Palm, V. (1994). Some basic criteria of the scientific method and internal structure of science. In R. Vihalemm et al. (Eds.), Philosophy and methodology of science in Estonia: The present state and prospects. Teaduslugu ja nüüdisaeg IX (pp. 102–130). Tallinn: EUHPS and Department of Philosophy of the University of Tartu [in Estonian].Google Scholar
  123. Palm, V. (2001). Some fundamental criteria of the scientific method and the internal structure of science. In R. Vihalemm (Ed.), Estonian studies in the history and philosophy of science. (Boston studies in the philosophy of science. Vol. 219) (pp. 91–110). Dordrecht, Boston, London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  124. Park, A. (1995). Selected articles. List of main publications. Proceedings of the Estonian Academy of Sciences. Humanities and Social Sciences, 44(3), 215–378, 389–394.Google Scholar
  125. Parve, V. (2001a). Paternalism under pressure. In J. C. Joerden, & J. N. Neumann (Eds.) Studien zur Ethik in Ostmitteleuropa. Medizinethik (pp. 123–137). Frankfurt a. M.: Peter Lang-Verlag.Google Scholar
  126. Parve, V. (2001b). Value-neutral paternalism. In R. Vihalemm (Ed.), Estonian studies in the history and philosophy of science. (Boston studies in the philosophy of science. Vol. 219) (pp. 271–282). Dordrecht, Boston, London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  127. Parve V. (2003) National regulations on ethics and research in Estonia. European Commission, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  128. Past, V. (2001). The emergence of physical chemistry: The contribution of the University of Tartu. In R. Vihalemm (Ed.), Estonian studies in the history and philosophy of science. (Boston studies in the philosophy of science. Vol. 219) (pp. 35–50). Dordrecht, Boston, London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  129. Past, V. (2004). Wilhelm Ostwald and physical chemistry at the University of Tartu. In R. Vihalemm et al. (Eds.), Special issue “Proceedings of the 7th Summer Symposium of the International Society for the Philosophy of Chemistry (Tartu, 16-20 August, 2003)” (pp. 19–25). Studia Philosophica, IV(40). Tartu: Tartu University Press.Google Scholar
  130. Podlishevsky O. (1975) The methodology of studying the language of natural science in logical empiricism. In: Gorsky D.P., Gryaznov B.S. (eds). Pozitivizm i nauka. Nauka, Moscow, pp. 160–190 [in Russian].Google Scholar
  131. Podlishevsky, O. (1980/1982). Contemporary bourgeois philosophy of science about the language and development of scientific knowledge, Vol. 1–2. Tallinn: Academy of Sciences of the Estonian SSR [in Russian].Google Scholar
  132. Pork A. (1980a) Historical explanation, A critical analysis of non-Marxist theories. Eesti Raamat, Tallinn [in Russian].Google Scholar
  133. Pork A. (1980b) On the principles of studying the “rational” explanation in history. Filosofskiye nauki 2: 134–137 [in Russian].Google Scholar
  134. Pork A. (1982) A note on schemes of historical explanation. Philosophy of the Social Sciences 12: 409–414Google Scholar
  135. Pork A. (1983) The Problem of explanation in the contemporary non-Marxist philosophy. Filosofskiye Nauki 4: 102–110 [in Russian].Google Scholar
  136. Pork A. (1985a) Assessing relative causal importance in history. History and Theory 24: 62–69CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  137. Pork A. (1985b) The “competition” of causes in historical explanation. Proceedings of the Estonian Academy of Sciences. Social Sciences 1: 143–153 [in Russian].Google Scholar
  138. Pork A. (1988) Critical philosophy of history in Soviet Thought. History and Theory 27: 41–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  139. Pork A. (1989) The role of examples in social explanation. Philosophy of the Social Sciences 19: 409–414CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  140. Pork, A. (1990). History, lying, and moral responsibility. History and Theory, 29, 3, 321–330.Google Scholar
  141. Prigogine, I., & Stengers, I. (1984). Order out of chaos: man’s new dialogue with nature. Toronto, New York, London, Sydney: Bantam Books.Google Scholar
  142. Rebane J. (1967) On the social nature of cognition. Eesti Raamat, Tallinn [in Estonian].Google Scholar
  143. Rebane J. (1980) Some problems involved in comprehensive approach to social determination of knowledge. Ajatus 38: 176–200Google Scholar
  144. Rebane J. (1982) Information and social memory: some comments on the problem of the social determination of cognition. Voprosy filosofii 8: 44–55 [in Russian; Summary in English: 173–174].Google Scholar
  145. Rebane J. (1983) Social determination of scientific knowledge. In: Kazyutinsky V.V. et al. (eds). Dialectics in the science about nature and science about man I: Dialectics, worldview and methodology of contemporary natural science. Nauka, Moscow, pp. 241–247 [in Russian].Google Scholar
  146. Rebane J. (1986) The main problems of epistemology. Eesti Raamat, Tallinn [in Estonian].Google Scholar
  147. Rosentau M. (2001) Providing proof in the standard model of knowledge. Juridica 3: 188–205 [in Estonian].Google Scholar
  148. Rosentau, M. (2004). Concept of law: The functional program of social activity. (Dissertationes Iuridicae Universitatis Tartuensis 14). Tartu: Tartu University Press [in Estonian].Google Scholar
  149. Ruutsoo R. (1995) Andrus Park: Political and historical philosopher. Proceedings of the Estonian Academy of Sciences. Humanities and Social Sciences 44/3: 194–205Google Scholar
  150. Salthe S.N. (1993) Should prediction or historical uniqueness be the central focus of biology?. Folia Baeriana 6: 247–260Google Scholar
  151. Scholz, M. (2003). Matthias Jacob Schleiden in Tartu (Dorpat) 1863-1864. Streitigkeiten, Intrigen, Hintergründe. Essen: Die Blaue Eule.Google Scholar
  152. Shlapentokh V. (1987) The politics of sociology in the Soviet Union. Delphic Monograph Series. Westview Press, BoulderGoogle Scholar
  153. Siilivask K. (eds) (1985) History of Tartu University 1632–1982. Perioodika, TallinnGoogle Scholar
  154. Sutrop M. (eds) (2004) Special issue “Human genetic databases: ethical, legal and social issues”. Trames: Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences 8(1/2): 5–253Google Scholar
  155. Sutrop U. (eds) (2003) Special issue “Science policy (in Estonia)”. Trames: Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences 7(1): 3–62Google Scholar
  156. Sutt, T. (1973). On the re-evaluation of Baer’s teleological views. In K. M. Zavadsky (Ed.), Istoriya i teoriya evolutsionnogo ucheniya, 1, (pp. 113–120). Leningrad: Acad. Sci. USSR [in Russian].Google Scholar
  157. Sutt T. (1976) On the problem of teleonomicity of development process in organic nature. In: Novak V.J.A., Pacltova I. (eds). Evolutionary biology. Czechoslovak Acad. Sci., Prague, pp. 335–342Google Scholar
  158. Sutt T. (1977) The problem of direction in organic evolution. Valgus, Tallinn [in Russian].Google Scholar
  159. Sutt T. (1982) The interactions between man and nature from the point of view of contemporary evolutionism. In: Novak V.J.A., Mlikovsky J. (eds). Evolution and environment. Czechoslovak Acad. Sci., Prague, pp. 969–976Google Scholar
  160. Sutt T. (1985) On the methodological meaning of the evolutionary approach to the uniqueness of life. In: Mikitenko D.A., Ozadovskaya L.V. (eds). Metodologicheskiye aspekty yestestvennonauchnykh issledovanii. Naukova dumka, Kiev, pp. 134–145 [in Russian].Google Scholar
  161. Sutt T. (1987) The anthropic principle and the synthetic theory of evolution. Proceedings of the Estonian Academy of Sciences. Biology 1: 1–8Google Scholar
  162. Tähepõld L., Ilomets T. (1995) Gustav von Bunge—a great scientist and teacher in development of physiological and pathological chemistry. Proceedings of the Estonian Academy of Sciences. Humanities and Social Sciences 44(2): 138–159Google Scholar
  163. Tammaru J. (1967) On the cognitive role of the principles of symmetry. In: Omelyanovsky M.E. (eds). Logic and methodology of science. Nauka, Moscow, pp. 307–310 [in Russian].Google Scholar
  164. Tammaru J. (1974) Laws and principles, Tartu Ülikooli toimetised. Töid filosoofia alalt 17: 17–34 [in Russian].Google Scholar
  165. Tammaru J. (1978) Symmetry and antinomy in the classical perception of space and time. In: Kedrov B.M., Ovchinnikov N.F. (eds). The principle of symmetry. Nauka, Moscow, pp. 155–162 [in Russian].Google Scholar
  166. Tammaru, J. (2001). Symmetry and rationality. In R. Vihalemm (Ed.), Estonian studies in the history and philosophy of science. (Boston studies in the philosophy of science. Vol. 219) (pp. 179–184). Dordrecht, Boston, London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  167. Tammelo I. (1961) On the lawyer’s search for contact with the philosopher. Journal for Legal Education 13: 187–203Google Scholar
  168. Tammelo I. (1963) The nature of facts as a juristic topos. Archiv für Rechts- und Sozialphilosohie 39: 235–261Google Scholar
  169. Tammelo I. (1964a) Law, logic and human communication. Archiv für Rechts- und Sozialphilosohie 50: 331–366Google Scholar
  170. Tammelo I. (1964b) Legal formalism and formalistic devices in juristic thinking. In: Hook S. (eds). Law and philosophy: A symposium. New York University Press, New York, pp. 316–328Google Scholar
  171. Tammelo I. (1971) Survival and surpassing. The Hawthorn Press, MelbourneGoogle Scholar
  172. Tammelo I. (1978) Modern logic in service of law. Springer, Wien, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  173. Tammelo, I. (1982). Zur Philosophie der Gerechtigeit. Frankfurt a. M., Bern: Verlag Peter Lang.Google Scholar
  174. Tammelo, I. (2001). Justice and care. Ilmar Tammelo’s collected works, compiled by Raul Narits and Marju Luts. Tartu: Ilmamaa [in Estonian].Google Scholar
  175. Tankler, H. (2001). A university between two cultures: On the development of Tartu/Dorpat University in the 19th and early 20th centuries. In R. Vihalemm (Ed.), Estonian studies in the history and philosophy of science. (Boston studies in the philosophy of science. Vol. 219) (pp. 19–34). Dordrecht, Boston, London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  176. Teichmüller G. (1877) Darwinismus und Philosophie. C. Mattiesen, DorpatGoogle Scholar
  177. Tikk, A., & Parve, V. (2000). Ethics committees in Estonia. In J. Glasa (Ed.), Ethics committees in Central and Eastern Europe (pp. 173–178). (Council of Europe, Strasbourg. Proceedings of the International Bioethics Conference). Bratislava: Charis-IMEB Fdn.Google Scholar
  178. Torop P. (1992) The Tartu school as a school. In: Permyakov E. (eds). To honour of professor J. M. Lotman. Tartu University Press, Tartu, pp. 5–19 [in Russian].Google Scholar
  179. Torop P. (2000) New Tartu semiotics. European Journal for Semiotic Studies 12(1): 5–22Google Scholar
  180. Uexküll, J. (1928). Theoretische Biologie. 2te gänzl. nenbearb. Aufl. Berlin: J. Springer.Google Scholar
  181. Uibo A. (1982) Informational approach to the problem of objectivity of the reconstruction of historical past. Filosofskiye nauki 1: 26–35 [in Russian].Google Scholar
  182. Uibo A. (1985) The Marxist and “rational” in historical explanation. Proceedings of the Estonian Academy of Sciences. Social Sciences 34: 128–142 [in Russian].Google Scholar
  183. Uibo A. (1990) On the interdisciplinary character of the main methodological problems of historical knowledge. Proceedings of the Estonian Academy of Sciences. Social Sciences 39(3): 257–272 [in Russian].Google Scholar
  184. Unt, A. (2001). The Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics and common sense. In R. Vihalemm (Ed.), Estonian studies in the history and philosophy of science. (Boston studies in the philosophy of science. Vol. 219) (pp. 247–262). Dordrecht, Boston, London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  185. Uspenskij B.A., Ivanov V.V., Toporov V.N., Pjatigorskij A.M., Lotman Ju.M. (1973) Theses on the semiotic study of cultures (as applied to Slavic texts). In: van der Eng J., Grygar M. (eds) Structure of texts and semiotics of culture. Mouton, The Hague, Paris, pp. 1–28Google Scholar
  186. Uus U. (1994) Blindness of modern science. Tartu Observatory, TartuGoogle Scholar
  187. Uus, U. (2001). The glory and misery of modern science. In R. Vihalemm (Ed.), Estonian studies in the history and philosophy of science. (Boston studies in the philosophy of science. Vol. 219) (pp. 111–122). Dordrecht, Boston, London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  188. Valt L., Savisaar E. (1983) Global problems and future scenarios. Eesti Raamat, Tallinn [in Estonian].Google Scholar
  189. Valt L., Hütt V. (eds) (1975) The method of modelling and some problems of the history and methodology of natural science. Academy of Sciences of the Estonian SSR, Tallinn [in Russian].Google Scholar
  190. Valt L. (1960) On the cognitive significance of thought models in physics, Tartu Ülikooli toimetised. Töid filosoofia alalt 3: 99–108 [in Estonian].Google Scholar
  191. Valt, L. (1961). On the cognitive function of the modelling representations in contemporary physics. Vestnik LGU: Seriya ekonomiki, filosofii i prava (Proceedings of Leningrad State University: the Series on Economics, Philosophy and Law), 1(5), 74–84 [in Russian].Google Scholar
  192. Valt L. (1963) On the relationship between the structure and its elements. Voprosy filosofii 5: 44–53 [in Russian].Google Scholar
  193. Valt, L. (1964). Cognitive significance of modelling representations in physics. (Tartu Ülikooli toimetised, 153 . Töid filosoofia alalt, 8). Tartu: Tartu University Press [a monograph in Russian].Google Scholar
  194. Valt L. (1967) On the role of the thought experiment in the development of a scientific theory. In: Omelyanovsky M.E. (eds). Logic and Methodology of Science. Nauka, Moscow, pp. 205–210 [in Russian].Google Scholar
  195. Valt L. (1975) Object, problem and model. In: Valt L., Hütt V. (eds). The method of modelling and some problems of the history and methodology of natural science. Academy of Sciences of the Estonian SSR, Tallinn, pp. 16–27 [in Russian].Google Scholar
  196. Valt, L. (1994). On the resistance of Estonian philosophy of science to the Communist Party ideology. In R. Vihalemm (Eds.), Philosophy and methodology of science in Estonia: The present state and prospects. Teaduslugu ja nüüdisaeg IX (pp. 44–52). Tallinn: EUHPS and Department of Philosophy of the University of Tartu [in Estonian].Google Scholar
  197. Valt, M. (1977). K. E. v. Baer and Darwinism: A study of the drama of developmental ideas in biology. Tallinn: Valgus [in Estonian].Google Scholar
  198. Vihalemm P. (2001) Development of media research in Estonia. Nordicom Reviewl 22(2): 79–92Google Scholar
  199. Vihalemm R.A., Nyapinen L.Ya., Tool A.Yu. (1986) The social determination of cognition (The Second Tartu Conference). Filosofskiye nauki 3: 157–159 [in Russian].Google Scholar
  200. Vihalemm R. (eds) (1979) Methodology of science. Eesti Raamat, Tallinn [in Estonian].Google Scholar
  201. Vihalemm, R. (Ed.). (2001a). Estonian studies in the history and philosophy of science. (Boston studies in the philosophy of science. Vol. 219). Dordrecht, Boston, London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  202. Vihalemm, R., Earley, J. E. Sr., & Hallap, T. (Eds.). (2004). Special Issue “Proceedings of the 7th Summer Symposium of the International Society for the Philosophy of Chemistry (Tartu, 16–20 August, 2003)”. Studia Philosophica, IV(40). Tartu: Tartu University Press.Google Scholar
  203. Vihalemm, R., Martinson, K., Valt, L., Müürsepp, P., Loone, E. (Eds.). (1994). Philosophy and methodology of science in Estonia: The present state and prospects. Teaduslugu ja nüüdisaeg IX. Tallinn: EUHPS and Department of Philosophy of the University of Tartu [in Estonian].Google Scholar
  204. Vihalemm R. (1965) On the “double-layeredness” of structure and on the relationship between quantum mechanics and chemistry, Tartu Ülikooli toimetised. Töid filosoofia alalt 8: 72–88 [in Russian].Google Scholar
  205. Vihalemm R. (1974) Elaboration of the philosophical problems of chemistry. Voprosy filosofii 6: 90–95 [in Russian; Summary in English: 187–188].Google Scholar
  206. Vihalemm R. (1977) The notion of the “logic of the development of science” and some methodological questions of the analysis of the history of science. Filosofskiye nauki 5: 105–113 [in Russian].Google Scholar
  207. Vihalemm R. (1978) A methodological apparatus for the analysis of quantum chemistry. Dijalektika [Belgrade] 8(2–3): 209–214 [in Russian].Google Scholar
  208. Vihalemm R. (1980) Concept of scientificity and social determination of the formation of a science (on the basis of the history of chemistry). In: Bazhenov A.B., Akhundov M.D. (eds). Science in social, epistemological, and axiological aspects. Nauka, Moscow, pp. 345–358 [in Russian].Google Scholar
  209. Vihalemm R. (1981) The history of the formation of a science: On the development of chemistry. Valgus, Tallinn [in Estonian].Google Scholar
  210. Vihalemm R. (1982) The dilemma of “aprioristic rationality” and “historiographic positivism” in the Western philosophy of science. Voprosy filosofii 8: 55–65 [in Russian; Summary in English: 174].Google Scholar
  211. Vihalemm R. (1982a) Is a chemical picture of the world possible? (On the particular scientific pictures of the world). Filosofskiye nauki 1: 148–151 [in Russian].Google Scholar
  212. Vihalemm, R. (1982b). The Development of Chemistry and the Ideals of Scientificity. Czlowiek i Światopoglad [Warsaw] 1/2, 145–155 [in Polish].Google Scholar
  213. Vihalemm, R. (1983). On the philosophical foundations of different programs concerning the rational reconstruction of the history of science. In E. Sidorenko et al. (Eds.), Logic, methodology and philosophy of science (Papers of Soviet scientists adopted by the Soviet National organization committee for the VII International Congress on Logic, Methodology and Philosophy of Science. Austria, Salzburg, 11-16 July, 1983) (pp. 185–188). Sections 6, 8–13. Moscow: Institute of Philosophy of the USSR Academy of Sciences.Google Scholar
  214. Vihalemm, R. (1994). On the status of philosophy of science today and its peculiarities and prospects in Estonia. In R. Vihalemm et al. (Eds.), Philosophy and methodology of science in Estonia: The present state and prospects. Teaduslugu ja nüüdisaeg IX (pp. 6–23). Tallinn: EUHPS and Department of Philosophy of the University of Tartu [in Estonian].Google Scholar
  215. Vihalemm R. (1995a) Some comments on a naturalistic approach to the philosophy of science. Studia Philosophica 2(38): 9–18Google Scholar
  216. Vihalemm R. (1995b) The limits of science or its actual beginning?: On Ilya Prigogine’s treatmemt of science. Akadeemia 7(12): 2527–2540 [in Estonian; Summary in English: 2659-2660]Google Scholar
  217. Vihalemm R. (1999) Can chemistry be handled as its own type of science?. In: Psarros N., Gavroglu K. (eds). Ars mutandi: Issues in philosophy and history of chemistry. Leipziger Universitätsverlag, Leipzig, pp. 83–88Google Scholar
  218. Vihalemm R. (2000) The Kuhn-loss thesis and the case of phlogiston theory. Science Studies, [Helsinki] 13(1): 68–78Google Scholar
  219. Vihalemm, R. (2001b). Introduction: Estonian science studies. In R. Vihalemm (Ed.), Estonian studies in the history and philosophy of science. (Boston studies in the philosophy of science. Vol. 219) (pp. vii–xiv). Dordrecht, Boston, London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  220. Vihalemm, R. (2001c). Chemistry as an interesting subject for the philosophy of science. In R. Vihalemm (Ed.), Estonian studies in the history and philosophy of science. (Boston studies in the philosophy of science. Vol. 219) (pp. 185–200). Dordrecht, Boston, London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
  221. Vihalemm R. (2003a) Are laws of nature and scientific theories peculiar in chemistry? Scrutinizing Mendeleev’s discovery. Foundations of Chemistry 5(1): 7–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  222. Vihalemm, R. (2003b). Natural kinds, explanation, and essentialism in chemistry. In J. E. Earley, Sr. (Ed.), Chemical explanation: Characteristics, development, autonomy (pp. 59–70). (Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. 988). New York: The New York Academy of Sciences.Google Scholar
  223. Vihalemm, R. (2004a). Foreword: Some remarks on the emergence of philosophy of chemistry in the East and West. In R. Vihalemm et al. (Eds.), Special issue “Proceedings of the 7th Summer Symposium of the International Society for the Philosophy of Chemistry (Tartu, 16-20 August, 2003)” (pp. 7–15). Studia Philosophica, IV(40). Tartu: Tartu University Press.Google Scholar
  224. Vihalemm, R. (2004b). Ostwald’s philosophy of chemistry in today’s context. In J. Briedis et al. (Eds.), Scientific Proceedings of Riga Technical University. Series 8: The humanities and social sciences. History of science and higher education. Vol. 5 (pp. 29–35). Riga: RTU.Google Scholar
  225. Vihalemm, R. (2004c). The problem of the unity of science and chemistry. In D. Sobczynska, P. Zeidler, & E. Zielonacka-Lis (Eds.), Chemistry in the philosophical melting pot (pp. 39–58). (In series: Dia-Logos. Studies in philosophy and social sciences). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang Europäischer Verlag der Wissenschaften.Google Scholar
  226. Vihalemm R. (2005a) Chemistry and a theoretical model of science: On the occasion of a recent debate with the Christies. Foundations of Chemistry 7(2): 171–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  227. Vihalemm, R. (2005b). W. Ostwald and the methodology of chemistry. In B. Görs, N. Psarros, & P. Ziche (Eds.), Wilhelm Ostwald at the crossroads between chemistry, philosophy and media culture (pp. 1–11). Leipzig: Leipziger Universitätsverlag.Google Scholar
  228. Zdravomyslov A. (eds) (1968) Structural functional analysis in modern sociology. Soviet Sociological Association, Moscow [in Russian].Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PhilosophyUniversity of TartuTartuEstonia
  2. 2.International University AudentesTallinnEstonia

Personalised recommendations