Pagina principaleGruppiConversazioniAltroStatistiche
Cerca nel Sito
Questo sito utilizza i cookies per fornire i nostri servizi, per migliorare le prestazioni, per analisi, e (per gli utenti che accedono senza fare login) per la pubblicità. Usando LibraryThing confermi di aver letto e capito le nostre condizioni di servizio e la politica sulla privacy. Il tuo uso del sito e dei servizi è soggetto a tali politiche e condizioni.

Risultati da Google Ricerca Libri

Fai clic su di un'immagine per andare a Google Ricerca Libri.

Sto caricando le informazioni...

La conoscenza umana : le sue possibilità e i suoi limiti (1948)

di Bertrand Russell

Altri autori: Vedi la sezione altri autori.

UtentiRecensioniPopolaritàMedia votiCitazioni
400362,784 (3.94)2
How do we know what we "know"? How did we -as individuals and as a society - come to accept certain knowledge as fact? In Human Knowledge, Bertrand Russell questions the reliability of our assumptions on knowledge. This brilliant and controversial work investigates the relationship between 'individual' and 'scientific' knowledge. First published in 1948, this provocative work contributed significantly to an explosive intellectual discourse that continues to this day.… (altro)
Sto caricando le informazioni...

Iscriviti per consentire a LibraryThing di scoprire se ti piacerà questo libro.

Attualmente non vi sono conversazioni su questo libro.

» Vedi le 2 citazioni

Mostra 3 di 3
This is a book written for the general reader, with the aim of presenting a system that allows us to come by something that we can claim as being knowledge; he tries to deal with the problem of induction. The work appears to be motivated by a desire to philosophically justify the common sense beliefs and behaviour of scientists, and to provide context the book opens with a brief summary of the important things that we know in each of the different fields of science ( circa 1950).
The book is over 500 pages, and there are lengthy discussions on all the relevant areas. These are broken down as far as possible into small chapters, which makes this book more readable than it might otherwise have been. Some of the most important topics which make up the argument presented here are: knowledge, causality, inference, language, observation, other minds, structure, probability, and logic. Probability is probably what is relied on most in escaping the induction problem itself, and this is what in fact nearly all scientists do use to support their hypotheses, after they have collected their empirical data. In the section on probability he dissects several systems of probability, including one of Keynes', then appears to come to some vague conclusion that the use of statistical systems can be justified practically by their successful performance in predicting future phenomena (and this also can be measured statistically). So, empiricism is justified because it works, which is essentially what other books on this problem have decided, though they often reach this from slightly different angles. The section on probability is not light reading, with plenty of formulas, so if the reader is not a keen mathematician, some parts will either be hard work or worth passing over.
It might be worthwhile to compare this book to "The Problem of Knowledge" by A J Ayer, who was a contemporary of Russell who sought to deal with the same problem. Russell's book is more difficult to read (though his style is good and dry wit amusing), and is twice as long, because it deals more thoroughly with several relevant peripheral issues and includes some that Ayer does not. Ayer's book doesn't deal with the practicalities of science, (with which it could be argued that a philosopher needn't concern himself), however Russell rolls his sleeves up and tackles them quite well. Reading between the lines in Ayer, I think he and Russell both share several sentiments on the subject. Neither embrace scepticism (though acknowledging the sceptics point), and both are first class logicians who want to justify a common sense approach to science. Russell's work is the more impressive, due to its its comprehensive scope and greater completeness as a system, but Ayer's work has a greater elegance due in part to its avoidance of clunky topics such as probability which are not traditionally favoured by philosophers. So, anyone interested in understanding the problem would do well to read both books, but Russell's, despite arguably possessing more authority, is less easily approached and requires more effort in parts to digest. ( )
2 vota P_S_Patrick | Dec 31, 2011 |
FG-5
  Murtra | Oct 29, 2020 |
Russell, at his analytical best, explores what can be known and what constitutes knowledge itself. ( )
  Len_hart | Dec 2, 2007 |
Mostra 3 di 3
nessuna recensione | aggiungi una recensione

» Aggiungi altri autori (6 potenziali)

Nome dell'autoreRuoloTipo di autoreOpera?Stato
Bertrand Russellautore primariotutte le edizionicalcolato
Slater, John G.Introduzioneautore secondarioalcune edizioniconfermato

Appartiene alle Collane Editoriali

Elenchi di rilievo

Devi effettuare l'accesso per contribuire alle Informazioni generali.
Per maggiori spiegazioni, vedi la pagina di aiuto delle informazioni generali.
Titolo canonico
Dati dalle informazioni generali inglesi. Modifica per tradurlo nella tua lingua.
Titolo originale
Titoli alternativi
Data della prima edizione
Personaggi
Luoghi significativi
Eventi significativi
Film correlati
Epigrafe
Dedica
Incipit
Dati dalle informazioni generali inglesi. Modifica per tradurlo nella tua lingua.
Introduction -- The central purpose of this book is to examine the relation between individual experience and the general body of scientific knowledge. It is taken for granted that scientific knowledge, in its broad outlines, is to be accepted. Skepticism, while logically impeccable, is psychologically impossible, and there is an element of frivolous insincerity in any philosophy which pretends to accept it. Moreover, if skepticism is to be theoretically defensible, it must reject all inference from what is experienced; a partial skepticism, such as the denial of physical events experienced by no one, or a solipsism which allows events in my future or in my unremembered past, has no logical justification, since it must admit principles of inference which lead to beliefs that it rejects.
Citazioni
Ultime parole
Dati dalle informazioni generali inglesi. Modifica per tradurlo nella tua lingua.
(Click per vedere. Attenzione: può contenere anticipazioni.)
Nota di disambiguazione
Redattore editoriale
Elogi
Lingua originale
Dati dalle informazioni generali spagnole. Modifica per tradurlo nella tua lingua.
DDC/MDS Canonico
LCC canonico

Risorse esterne che parlano di questo libro

Wikipedia in inglese (1)

How do we know what we "know"? How did we -as individuals and as a society - come to accept certain knowledge as fact? In Human Knowledge, Bertrand Russell questions the reliability of our assumptions on knowledge. This brilliant and controversial work investigates the relationship between 'individual' and 'scientific' knowledge. First published in 1948, this provocative work contributed significantly to an explosive intellectual discourse that continues to this day.

Non sono state trovate descrizioni di biblioteche

Descrizione del libro
Riassunto haiku

Discussioni correnti

Nessuno

Copertine popolari

Link rapidi

Voto

Media: (3.94)
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3 4
3.5 2
4 7
4.5
5 4

Sei tu?

Diventa un autore di LibraryThing.

 

A proposito di | Contatto | LibraryThing.com | Privacy/Condizioni d'uso | Guida/FAQ | Blog | Negozio | APIs | TinyCat | Biblioteche di personaggi celebri | Recensori in anteprima | Informazioni generali | 203,239,540 libri! | Barra superiore: Sempre visibile