History of Rationalities: Ways of Thinking from Vico to Hacking and Beyond, 2023

The idea that in human history it is possible to recognize distinct ways of thinking is widespread in the literature. Sometimes, instead of the phrase ‘ways of thinking’, other labels are used, such as ‘forms of thought’, ‘modes of thinking’, ‘ways of knowing’, ‘ways of reasoning’, ‘mental attitudes’ or ‘worldviews’. At any rate, it is possible to say that there is a concept, that of ‘ways of thinking’, which has played a crucial role in philosophy at least since the Enlightenment and has acquired considerable weight with the emergence of a French tradition in philosophy of science called historical epistemology. This concept appears in different versions, as if they were species of the same genus. In this chapter, I shall outline its history, from Vico to Hacking and beyond, and I shall show how and why its different species have been introduced. My account provides a guiding thread running through philosophy of science that unifies the researches of important authors such as Lévy-Bruhl, Brunschvicg, Metzger, Koyré, Fleck, Foucault, Kuhn, Hacking and others. This guiding thread is mainly constituted by the project of historicizing Kant’s a priori by replacing it with a given notion of ‘ways of thinking’.

Emergence, 2002

1989

Obsolete Models Science is forcing us to change our view of the world. As Alfred North Whitehead has written, "The old foun dations of scientific thought are be coming unintelligible. Time, space, matter, structure, pattern, function, etc. all require reinterpretation" (Harris 1983) Thomas Kuhn (1957) explains that "for half a century we have been in the midst of [a] . . conceptual revolution that is once again changing the scientist's concep tion of space, matter, force, and the structure of the universe.' Peter Drucker (1969) writes, "The fact that we are shifting from a Cartesian view of the universe, in which the accent has been on parts and elements, to a configuration view, with emphasis on wholes and patterns, challenges every single dividing line between areas of study and knowledge." Because of these upheavals in thought, the conceptual models of the world that our culture uses are no longer consistent with scientific knowledge. As a result,...

Lomonosov Moscow State University, Moscow, Russia, 2015

The following article is an introduction to the project “Psychology of the Modernity: Challenges of Uncertainty, Complexity, and Diversity”. The motives behind the creation of this project are discussed, and the construct «psychology of modernity». There are different features of modernity described; a special focus is on the mechanisms of generating uncertainty in development of open structures. A hypothesis of evolutionary meaning of art and religion in invention of modernity is formulated. A role of historical-evolutionary methodology of interdisciplinary cognition as an integrative programme of psychology, which allows the latter to enter into a constructive dialogue with the broad range of sciences of nature, society and human, is recognized.

Modes of Future Thought, 2005

Big History begins with the moment when the "prime singularity" erupted to create time, space and matter (even if the prime singularity consisted in nothing). Big History encounters the universe's movement into greater complexity rather than its entropy. We are engaged in studying the great difficulty and limitedness with which such an apparent anomaly occurs. The development of our own biosphere, which, following the thought of the brilliant Physicist AleksandrPanov 1 includes the evolution of human civilisations (and humans themselves) and technologies, is one island of this increasing complexity. Such complexity brings with it fragility and vulnerability, and this is a theme that should be of special interest to us, as our own biosphere is at the point of a singularity which must be examined in all earnestness. Since modes of evolution may well be occurring on other planets in other galaxies, complexity may be a feature in may places in our universe. We are at a point in history which must be called "Axial II," the second great axial era. This transformational epoch, which many refer to as a "singularity" is no less profound that the first axial era. In the past century, mankind opened his vision of history to incorporate the entire universe into the system. We moved from the mythological to the scientific in our understanding of the cosmos, just as we have moved into the reality of human history, disturbing as it is for many. With scientist such as Henry Markram 2 on the verge of creating an artificial intelligence with computer technology, the almost certain probability of finding some life forms on other planets or moons in our own solar system, and the likelihood of sentient life forms in other solar systems or galaxies, the vision and understanding of the nature of man himself is changing. Only with great difficulty and resolve can we encounter these unfolding conditions without forming new ideologies to replace failed ideologies 1. Panov, Alexander D., Singularity of Evolution & Post-Singular Development (2011, unpublished).

(A rapid changing world), those were the words that the sociologist Anthony Giddens started his book, The Run Away World with, as he explains the great impact of globalization that by witch the world is witnessing tremendous development in science and technology, and those big leaps on the track of human styles of cognitive thinking. New features of the knowledge revolution are becoming more evident through expanding the role of intellect, ridding oneself from suppress of tyranny and power, that was once imposed by the cleric's and Catholic Church in Europe. The castles of logic are spreading upon the grounds of reality, in return of the retreat of superstitions that were once main obstacles confronting logical thinking. Rationalism Free thinking knocked the doors of humanity once it was first introduced by the philosophers of enlightment to emphasize upon the relation between (comprehension and creation) it's the controversy between deep understanding of reality(Anthony Giddens 2003) that is acquired by logical thinking, to be apt to form and construct reality. It's the action of (freedom and control) where man is freed from the burdens of the past, and eventually seizing the abilities to have control upon reality, subsequently, (Natasha Gill, 2010, p 67) stepping towards future with concrete steps. There is no means to create reality without understanding it, that's how the Marxian mindset interpreted (MariosCamihis, 1979) the nature of the relation between technical and scientific development in an approach to stabilize and sustain reality. Controlling it would be by understanding it deeply including all its details. This control was deteriorated quickly, for what science and technology have controlled by understanding nature and its details, it has become today the main cause of losing this control. Today both are blamed for pollution, greenhouse crisis, raise in psychological stress, depression, raise of unemployment, risks of nuclear leaks, and global markets' crises. Here we witness the retreat of (clear and absolute) that were the main pride of science and technology, during the past and a half century of the human race, pushing the world into the turn of ambiguity and phobia, towards catastrophes that still lie unknown.

GEP 0801: The History of 20th Century Thought, 2017

This is the course that I taught at Bahcesehir University in the Summer term of 2017. It is a course that I designed to deliver necessary theories and approaches on the problems of political economy. The course aims at exploring the major approaches of political that had a great impact on the thoughts produced in the 20th century.

Questions concerning the nature of thought are as old as history itself. I offer a brief history 1 that focuses on a particular question: Is thought a material process?

1997

Two logically opposed interpretations of the meaning of current (soft and critical) systems thinking are drawn: thinking about the holistic power structure that constitutes the ground for the possibility of a situation and thinking how to accommodate conflicting parties into a given order. The epochal coexistence of these two apparently logically opposed modes of thinking are interpreted under an historical-ontological perspective. It is shown how the failure of the project of the Enlightenment has led to the constitution of a postmodern order dominated by instrumental thinking and absolute relativism, which sometimes disguises itself under the mask a few key notions of the project of the Enlightenment that rapidly become nothing but "plastic words" informing the mass-media publicity game.