Nevertheless, Hölder shows that an alternative strategy is not excluded: he profits from Kantian objections in order to develop a consistent empiricism. Secondly, Poincaré uses the opposition between Kantianism and empiricism to argue for his geometrical conventionalism. Firstly, the related methodological considerations were crucial for the development of his epistemology. Nevertheless, I think that Hölder’s view is worth discussing, for two reasons. He maintains that geometry depends on experience also after Poincaré’s fundamental criticism of Helmholtz. Hölder’s philosophy of geometry might appear to be the most problematic part of his epistemology.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |