| Annotation Metadata
|
^"permissions":^"read":ӶӺ,"update":ӶӺ,"delete":ӶӺ,"admin":ӶӺ°,"user":^"id":6,"name":"Sarah Oberbichler"°,"id":"Sk5c2cg1u9","ranges":Ӷ^"start":"/divӶ3Ӻ/divӶ4Ӻ/divӶ1Ӻ/pӶ25Ӻ","startOffset":0,"end":"/divӶ3Ӻ/divӶ4Ӻ/divӶ1Ӻ/blockquoteӶ2Ӻ/pӶ1Ӻ/supӶ1Ӻ/aӶ1Ӻ","endOffset":4°Ӻ,"quote":"This second doubt is, indeed, more serious in its consequences than that concerning the reliability of our senses; it undermines any representation of objective structure in the real world and, thus, inevitably raises the question why and, above all, how it comes about that we search for and can also find a structure in our experiential world, when such a structure may not be given by reality. In other words, if Kant’s statement is correct and our experience can teach us nothing about the nature of things in themselves,Ӷ18Ӻ how, then, can we explain that we nevertheless experience a world that is in many respects quite stable and reliable? \nThat is the main question which radical constructivism attempts to deal with, and the answer it suggests was prepared, at least in its main lines, by Giambattista Vico in 1710, more than half a century before Kant: \n\nAs God’s truth is what God comes to know as he creates and assembles it, so human truth is what man comes to know as he builds it shaping it by his actions. Therefore science (scientia) is the knowledge (cognitio) of origins, of the ways and the manner how things are made.Ӷ19Ӻ","highlights":Ӷ^"jQuery3210202764590961224342":^°°,^"jQuery3210202764590961224342":^°°,^"jQuery3210202764590961224342":^°°,^"jQuery3210202764590961224342":^°°,^"jQuery3210202764590961224342":^°°Ӻ,"text":"","order":"mw-content-text","category":"WissenschaftlicheReferenz2","data_creacio":1560439669567°
|
