At a time of crisis and war in Europe, the Vienna Circle member Otto Neurath and the British philosopher L. Susan Stebbing corresponded and co-operated for over a decade from the 1930s onwards. Despite programmatic differences, they agreed that the role of philosophy, science and scientific expertise needed to be reconsidered and that the formation of modern democracies and an egalitarian global society had to be actively promoted that way. The aim was to improve the lives of as many people as possible and contribute to their happiness. For this purpose, it was necessary to find new techniques of knowledge transfer for the general public, but also to train people in critical thinking and in the judgement of facts and data—as an independent, questioning attitude dealing with institutions, politics, or the media. The requirements for transfer on the knowledge production side had to be reflected accordingly. The modernity of Neurath and Stebbing’s respective thoughts lies in their focus on the ordinary use and transfer of knowledge, in questioning the unlimited authority of scientific experts as well as the ideal of science at the time—in favour of a more pluralistic approach to fight propaganda and disinformation and support social change.

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

Scientific Humanism in Practice—L. Susan Stebbing and Otto Neurath

  • Silke Körber

摘要

At a time of crisis and war in Europe, the Vienna Circle member Otto Neurath and the British philosopher L. Susan Stebbing corresponded and co-operated for over a decade from the 1930s onwards. Despite programmatic differences, they agreed that the role of philosophy, science and scientific expertise needed to be reconsidered and that the formation of modern democracies and an egalitarian global society had to be actively promoted that way. The aim was to improve the lives of as many people as possible and contribute to their happiness. For this purpose, it was necessary to find new techniques of knowledge transfer for the general public, but also to train people in critical thinking and in the judgement of facts and data—as an independent, questioning attitude dealing with institutions, politics, or the media. The requirements for transfer on the knowledge production side had to be reflected accordingly. The modernity of Neurath and Stebbing’s respective thoughts lies in their focus on the ordinary use and transfer of knowledge, in questioning the unlimited authority of scientific experts as well as the ideal of science at the time—in favour of a more pluralistic approach to fight propaganda and disinformation and support social change.