Ruth Castillo THE PHENOMENOLOGY OF

0 downloads 0 Views 317KB Size Report
In reviewing the history of science, it shows indisputable progress and development. The episodes that frame each discovery reveal the environment under ...
Ruth Castillo THE PHENOMENOLOGY OF HUSSERL AND THE DYNAMISM OF PHYSICS Abstract In reviewing the history of science, it shows indisputable progress and development. The episodes that frame each discovery reveal the environment under which the man of science threw his results. From the Greeks to the present physics, reality and with it phenomena, we are presented before the senses, leaving to science, to distinguish the apparent from the real. Based on the success of science in this historical development, Husserl in 1900 exposes in his Logical Investigations, a method that would substantiate philosophy against the individual sciences, with mathematics to head. Despite the criticism of Husserl, about founding a method that leads to a final or primal criterion or fundamental science as well as establishing a method, the ideas of Husserl glimpse importance as to the effectiveness of the knowable thing so sensitive and even this is a sighting on the dynamism that has the structure of science, and the importance of the history of science. In this sense this work is directed, pointing to the ideas of Husserl that sustain the future of the work of science, in particular of physics. Keywords: dynamic, observer-phenomenon essence.

I.

Introduction

From the moment man began to philosophize, one of his jobs was to discuss what science is understood as true knowledge, as opposed to opinion or doxa. These studies led philosophers to face very interesting dilemmas. But it is undeniable that discussions on science received a completely different light from the moment in which began to assert the existence of particular sciences that seemed to deserve the full recognition of their cientificidad. The problem raised by the appearance of such sciences concerned the relationship between them and science in general theorized by philosophers: philosophy. The intention of this brief work is not to enter the study, however interesting, about the supremacy of a general science (if it exists) and the particular sciences. Neither of the unit in the multiple. Our mood is oriented to the analysis of the relationship, if any, between the transcendental foundations present in the phenomenology of Husserl and new concepts achieved by contemporary physics1 , for this we will rely on the journey through history science and its relationship with phenomenology, with the intent to show the important relationship between observer-phenomenon in physics and how through the shift in the role of observer, through the ideas of Husserl, current concepts in physics Show an important advance. I.

The requirement of becoming a science or nus last fundamentation

The success achieved by modern or contemporary physics marked a new beginning and a break with old scientific schemes. Going to consider vs. probability, determinism, and the ambiguity between object-physical observer from empirical intuition, they 1

When you refer to contemporary physics we are referring to the current physics. Author's Note

emphasize the importance of science foundation. In this respect, without going into an analysis of language scientistic2 , current concepts in physics require for their understanding, not only of mathematics operational management but also management in understanding about the ambiguity that address. In other words, progress and issues that physical poses today also brought, as a result of the ambiguity that includes the object known, operationalization in terms of Bridgman3, physical against phenomena. By 1900 Max Planck established his quantum theory; in the same year he published his Logical Investigations Husserl4 marking within the philosophy of the twentieth century a new trend: phenomenology. What sets Husserl is a method to study the ability to know the human being through the pursuit of a science foundation, ie a method to go to the things themselves5. The aspiration to develop a universal science and absolutely fundamental, resulting in one aspect of the intuition of the character of the natural sciences. This is significantly linked to his theory of the natural object and the phenomenology of perception. Of course, the seal contingency holds the individual being, refers to the discovery of the universality of its essence. And the natural laws represent the essence of objects of possible experience. Moreover, given the empirical intuition, explains imperfection of the natural sciences, as the physical object is always given visible on one side, allowing new determinations of the thing giving the dynamic nature of science6. It is the infinite perception of the object which affects the development of science and allows the dynamism of its structure7. This evolution is science proclaims the requirement of ultimate foundation. An example is quantum when discontinuities are attributed to atomic processes marking the polemic between determinism and probability. Against this, Bohr says that the level of observation of atomic phenomena, objective autonomy classical physics running for the duality object-observation instrument is lost8. Consequently Bohr holding “is necessary to address a radical change in the relations between space-time description and the principle of causality which symbolize, respectively, the ideal possibilities observation and definition and which binding is character- theories classic”9. That is, the fact relativize the notion of observer implies, define a field of validity” restricted to cases judged by Husserl metaphysicians10. Here is an interesting point. Another example to be pointed out is that of observations in astrophysics and cosmology, especially in relation to gravitational waves; therein the observer has a relative role in the perception of these waves and their possible consequences in conceptualizing the spacetime regarding the topological aspects derived from this relativizing the observer11. All these exemplifications, establish a relativization of the instrument of observation (subject). Husserl stresses the very nature of course involves stating, first, that "there is an external real world that exists independently of our act of 2

CFR. Geymonat, L., Philosophy and Philosophy of Science, Barcelona, Labor, 1970 Bridgman, P., The operationalist conception of physical theories, Caracas, UCV, 1985 4 Husserl, E., Logical Investigations, Madrid, Alliance, 1982 5 Ibídem 6 Cf. Geymonat, L., Philosophy and Philosophy, ..., cit., P.7 7 Ibid., P.8 8 CFR. Schwartzmann, F., Husserl and modern science, Santiago de Chile, University, 1959, p.1 9 Ibídem 10 Cf. Jimenez, RA, "Adorno and phenomenology of Husserl" Logos. Annals Seminar Metaphysics, (1996), No. 30, pp. 133-150 11 Cfr. Schwartzmann, F., Husserl and modern science, Santiago de Chile, University, 1959 3

knowing"12, and then say that the world "is not directly knowable"13. It does not frighten him to draw consequences from the nature of those modes of foundation he designates as basic "theorems" of physics. In effect, he concludes: "In a sense these two judgments contradict each other. This fact reveals the presence of an irrational or mystical element which adheres to physical science as any other branch of human knowledge "14. II.

Physics and dynamism: An approximation or the ideas of Husserl

The object becomes problematic because the unattainable and unknowable - as in the case of gravitational waves or quantum supergravity therefore continues Husserl analysis peculiarity of scientific knowledge, investigating the following methodical limitations15. Hence, in his thought, the finding of criteria of evidence and purely probable knowledge are complementary. In this sense, they articulated in his epistemology refutation of psychologism, recognizing the limits of induction and the impossibility of proving the natural laws with "intellectual evidence"16. Natural laws demonstrated by the inductive method, in their view only flaunt evidence "the degree of probability" of its validity, in contrast to the apodictic character exhibiting the "pure logic" laws 17. Here Husserl points out the problem of induction in science. In this sense, scientific statements are subject to a process of successive approximations and endless and continuous discovery readjustments between theory and reality18. In this way, the measure of the rigor of laws is relativized. Its validity would reside in the fact of reflecting an ultimate reality. Moreover, this is not possible, thus its value is reduced to be a possible type of description of the phenomenon among countless others, and we can say that among all these possibilities is chosen the simplest and easiest, simply by requiring the Descriptions of science itself. In this sense, the inductions and verifications that legitimize the scientific descriptions, fail to hide their stamp of descriptive, non-essential singularity. Husserl sees revealed here infinitude to display, uses a crucial example because "we know a priori he says there are infinite laws that can and should give the same result as the law of gravitation Newton, recommended only for their particular -simplicity". The theory of general relativity is the proof of it. For Husserl inevitable inaccuracy of the observations19. III.

The act of knowing in f í music: journey through the history of science

We found, for example, in the study of the movements and trajectories of celestial

bodies, measured mathematically are not captured visibly20. It follows that cater to the sensible or intelligible, is to distinguish between "observational astronomy" and "true

12

Husserl, E., Logical Investigations, Madrid, Alianza, 1982, p.197ss. Ibid., P.197 ss 14 Ibídem 15 Ibídem 16 Schwartzmann, F., and Husserl., ..., cit., P.4 17 Husserl, E., Logical Investigations, ..., cit., P. 207ss 18 Cf. Jimenez, RA, "Adorno and phenomenology of Husserl" Logos. Annals Seminar Metaphysics, (1996), No. 30, pp. 133-150 19 Husserl, E., Logical Investigations, ... cit., 21 20 Schwartzmann, F., and Husserl., ..., cit., P.4 13

astronomy"21, which are not mutually exclusive, on the contrary, actual speeds must be inferred from the apparent. It is not, as in antiquity, to save face, but to give the best and more realistic approach considering the phenomenon within such descriptions, the simplest and clear possible. In its comments on Treaty sky, Aristotle, Simplicio raises clearly the cosmological problem of the Greeks, "he asks, what are the perfectly circular and regular movements, which should be taken by hypothesis, so that they can save the appearances presented by the wandering stars "?22. Admitting therefore the existence of uniform circular motion, they must be such that its composition salve the apparent path of the planets; For example, their direct and retrograde movements. The immutable underlies the changing and must be understood through it. The disturbing complexity of celestial movements becomes simple, when considering geometry. What we want to point this example is like at each stage of science linkages between observation and theory dependent ontology that articulates. Thus, the observer is then a contemplator, with all its ethical-aesthetic and religious derivations. By valuing the purely contemplative, it is forbidden any kind of experience capable of modifying the conditions of appearance of the phenomenon. The appearance stands expressive of something that transcends it. Subsequently, as another example of the above statements, we turn to modern times where Galileo observed, we consider it ambiguous, as it opens a mathematically intelligible world, negating the observation itself against the intelligible. Galileo passes the roll contemplative observer, held in ancient times, the role of active observer, based on the insights, and passing through the sensitive phenomena concludes mathematically describe typical. This means that, basically, to Galileo, as shown Koyré23, the physical reality is not given by the senses, but apprehended by reason. The observer who seeks to save phenomena is a contemplator, who in successive approximations pursues the adaptation, as close to the identical as possible, between the apparent and the real. It does not aspire to modify the conditions in which it is possible to interrogate the existing thing, since it admits the reality of substantial forms. Thus, scientific generalizations are subordinated to a given ontology, as are the scope and possibilities of observing itself. Consequently, cosmologies always have prefigured their cognitive limits. This shows the interdependence between the doctrine of ultimate reality, the role played by the observer and the limits of knowledge and resulted. Everything is subordinated to the only type of adequacy conceived as possible between what is given by the senses and reason. Later, with the advent of the Renaissance, and l Renaissance observer desrealiza fading phenomena appearances judged not essentially complementary to the first reality. He is not concerned with losing his immediate and qualitative vision of the world. Consequently, the adequacy of knowledge will be pursued in another direction. Husserl emphasizes the importance of Galileo's influences on physics, even today, by substituting sensible nature for a world of mathematical idealities. An example is found in the general relativist theory where, through differentiable varieties, the world is described by non-Euclidean geometries not given to the sensible. For Husserl this is not a radical change given by contemporary physical theories but an extension of the Galilean principle which conceives of nature as mathematics itself. 21

Duhem., P., Le Systeme du Monde (Histoire des Doctrines cosmological Platon a Copernic), Paris, Hermann, vol.11, 1954, pp. 65,70, 77 and 113-115 22 Aristotle, Candel., M., On the Heavens, Madrid, Gredos, 1996 23 Koyre, From the Closed World to the Infinite Universe, vol. III, Baltimore, Hopkins Press, 1957

The importance of the relativization of the observer is found in Newton's principle of inertia, supported as is known in the relativistic invariance of Galileo. The problem of inertia, including the distinction between rest and movement through the sensible, enact the famous controversy with Leibniz, thereby relativizing the observer under intuitions a priori given in transcendental idealism Kant and thus considerations the active observer. Under the ontology of an absolute space and time, the Newtonian physicist seeks to shed appearances and formulate valid and irrefutable laws. Under Kant's ideas, and with the later arrival of contemporary physics, the limitations of the observer are revealed, and thus the belief in immutable laws, or the unifying principle of all science. The continuous adjustments and approximations of current or contemporary physics show the above, the illusory function of observations, leading to a dependence of mathematical operability given as a consequence of idealities leading contemporary physics to speak in terms of operations and not properties. Geymonat emphasizes in his Philosophy and Philosophy of Science, the importance of the dynamism of science, not only in structure but also in its concepts and language as well as the vital importance of the history of science for science to Time to formulate their conceptions. Based on the statements of Geymonat, we can cite the ideas of Husserl in hisCrisis of science24, which states that the Galilean mathematization of nature contains a kind of hypothesis, whose peculiar nature surprised: "Curious, then the hypothesis remains, despite verification, and hypothesis hereinafter forever "25. In his view, the only verification compatible with it a hypothesis, is never last, but must be continuously legitimized, articulating to an infinite course of verifications, granting that dynamic character that shows science, particularly physics, throughout its history. Husserl concludes: “It belongs to the very essence of the science of nature, and is a priori way of being, be hypothesis verification infinite and the infinite"26 . Thus, for Husserl, the error of physics is excluded, since at every stage of the evolution of the natural sciences the statements are consistent with the method and theory from which they depart. IV.

Conclusion

The importance of Husserl within the philosophy of science is framed within the becoming in the relativization of the subject-observer, as well as within the mathematical idealities. The current or contemporary physics is subject to such considerations because the last apprehension of the phenomenon, by the scientist is subjugated against the operationalization of physics in terms of Bridgman27 . Not that there is , as Husserl argues in the Logical Investigations, a hierarchy or a general science; As is known such attempts are unsuccessful. What rescues, within the ideas of Husserl, is the importance of the scientific discovery environment, its ontology, as well as the ongoing process ad infinitum about the description of the phenomenon under a hypothesis, either effectively or through Mathematical idealities. Current physics, both in quantum and astrophysics, and special and general relativity, requires mathematical vehicles for its description and development; It is for example, in quantum electrodynamics, the different descriptions are made within operations and mathematical objects due to the inability of 24

Husserl, E., The Crisis of European Sciences and Transcendental Phenomenology, Madrid, Folios, 1984 25 Ibídem 26 Ibíd 27 Bridgman, P., The operationalist conception of physical theories, Caracas, UCV, 1985

the sensible perception. In this sense, for physics, it is imperative to seek the essence of such objects that allow better approximations of external reality. Department of General Training and Basic Sciences Simon Bolivar University [email protected] [email protected]