Fitzgibbon backs stuarts warning to origin stars like Gogol and Tolstoy, when it comes to the truth
As a result, the author’s own book, ‘A History of the Future’ (1970), has been called “a study of one of science’s greatest philosophers of science.”
However, the new book, ‘Nietzsche and the Decline of the West,’ offers a radical rethinking of the role of Nietzsche and the rise of a new philosophy, which he believed was capable of “sapping science, that great and eternal machine, of the great discoveries that men make, the discoveries which reveal the world to itself for the first time.”
“This new philosophy does not, on its very face, claim to be an alternative to science. It goes directly against a whole strand of that great science that we have, and the most important part of it is what, as we have seen, Nietzsche is absolutely opposed to,” says Prof. Fauconnier. “In fact, he is a bit of a proto-skeptical.”
To explain what Nietzsche meant by these “mythical discoveries,” the professor and others, including his co-author, associate professor Stephen J. Fauconnier, trace an evolutionary theory to Nietzsche’s philosophy of science that goes a long way in laying the groundwork for this new philosophy.
“Nietzsche, in a word, was an evolutionaryist, a neo-Darwinian and a phenomenologist. So, this idea that science is a matter of trying to discover a higher order of facts or truths, that is to say, that reality is a matter of what we know, and not of what we do, comes very early to the Nietzschean view,” Prof. Fauconnier explains.
It is Nietzsche’s idea of the discovery of truth that the profes포항출장샵sor calls the “idea of the origin and decay of civilization,” and also, he says, the “futility of science.”
울산출장마사지“This notion of Nietzsche’s origin is a much more serious concept than the concept of Darwinism,” Prof. Fauconnier says. “We know about Darwin’s theory, but we do not yet know the origin of that theory, and we don’t know how it was for슬롯 머신med. So this theory is what Nietzsche saw as the foundation for modernity, for the idea that what science does is discover truth, not truth itself, the way that the Enlightenment did, and that if science is successful, history is also achieved.”