Nauka a nuda – spojrzenie z perspektywy filozoficznej

Dorian 	Mączka

doi:10.51196/srz.11.9

Articles

No. 2(11) (2016): Boredom

Science and Boredom – the Philosophical Perspective

Dorian Mączka

PDF (Polish)

Submitted: 26 June 2020
Published: 01-11-2016

Abstract

In this paper the author tries to analyze the presence of boredom in science and, at the same time, to answer the question of whether science has to be boring (or if it should be boring). Examples from sociology, anthropology, and the history of science are presented. These examples suggest that boredom has repeatedly accompanied successful scientific endeavors. The idea of normal science, as proposed by Thomas Kuhn, is used to explain the presence of boredom in science and to argue that boredom and advanced scientific research are in fact inseparable. The analysis makes it possible to draw conclusions about science as well as about boredom. Contrary to what might be suggested by the philosophy of science, monotonous, uninteresting, or fragmentary research turns out to play an impor-tant role in science. At the same time, boredom can be seen as a catalyst of change and intellectual advancement. The difference between the feeling of boredom and the value of boring activity is also observed.

References

Bachelard G. 2002. Kształtowanie się umysłu naukowego: prz ycz ynek do psychoanaliz y wiedzy obiektywnej, tłum. D. Leszczyński, Słowo/Obraz Terytoria.
Brissett D., Snow R. 1993. Boredom. Where the Future Isn’t, „Symbolic Interaction”, nr 16(3), s. 237–256.
Donnelly K. 2014. On the Boredom of Science: Positional Astronomy in the Nineteenth Century, „The British Journal for the History of Science”, nr 47(3), s. 479–503.
Drabik L. i in., red. 2008. Słownik języka polskiego PWN, Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.
Feyerabend P. 1979. Ku pocieszeniu specjalisty, [w:] tegoż, Jak być dobrym empirystą?, tłum. K. Zamiara, Państwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe, s. 200– 250.
Feyerabend P. 1985. Science in a Free Society, Verso.
Heidegger M.1992. Die Grundbegriffe der Metaphysik: Welt – Endlichkeit – Einsamkeit, Vittorio Klostermann.
Kierkegaard S. 1982. Albo – albo, t. 1, tłum. J. Iwaszkiewicz, Państwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe.
Kuhn T. 2009. Struktura rewolucji naukowych, tłum. J. Nowotniak, Wydawnictwo Aletheia.
Latour B., Woolgar S. 1986. Laboratory Life. The Construction of Scientific Facts, Princeton University Press.
Latour B. 2003. Science in Action. How to Follow Scientists and Engineers through Society, Harvard University Press.
Laudan L. 1977. Progress and its Problems. Towards a Theory of Scientific Growth, University of California Press.
Laudan L. 1981. A Problem-solving Approach to Scientific Progress, [w:] Scientific Revolutions, red. I. Hacking, Oxford University Press, s. 144–155.
Popper K. 1970. Normal Science and its Dangers, [w:] Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge, red. I. Lakatos, A. Musgrave, Cambridge University Press, s. 51–58.
Popper K. 2002. Logika odkrycia naukowego, tłum. U. Niklas, Fundacja Aletheia.
Schopenhauer A. 1994. Świat jako wola i przedstawienie, t. 1, tłum. Jan Garewicz, Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.
Svendsen L. 2005. A Philosophy of Boredom, tłum. J. Irons, Reaktion Books.
Toohey P. 2012. Historia nudy, tłum. K. Ciarcińska, Bellona.
Traweek S. 1992. Beamtimes and Lifetimes. The World of High Energy Physicists, Harvard University Press.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Keywords

science
philosophy of science
boredom
Kuhn

How to Cite

Mączka, Dorian. (2016). Science and Boredom – the Philosophical Perspective. Stan Rzeczy, 2(11), 149-165. https://doi.org/10.51196/srz.11.9

Share

Similar Articles

Tadeusz Szawiel , Social Scienes and the Presence of Philosophy , Stan Rzeczy: No. 1(1) (2011): Demons in the Social Sciences
Jacek Migasiński, Marek Pokropski, Husserl and the Philosophy of Radical Beginnings , Stan Rzeczy: No. 1(16) (2019): Total Intellectuals
Zofia Jakubowicz-Prokop, The Metaphysical Possibility of Feminism: Sexual Difference and Questions about the Nature of the World , Stan Rzeczy: No. 1(22) (2022): The Return of Metaphysics
Karolina J. Dudek, Ethnographic Museum Between Science and Art. On Modes of Legitimization in the Process of Assembling Museum Objects and the Museum Crisis , Stan Rzeczy: No. 1(4) (2013): The State of Art
Michał Łuczewski, Michael Kennedy, Anna Giza-Poleszczuk, Is It Possible to Be a Happy Professor? , Stan Rzeczy: No. 1(20) (2021): Predatory Identities
Jonathan Scovil, In the Land of Ulro: The Religious Vision of the Cosmos and the Human Being versus the Scientific Image of the World , Stan Rzeczy: No. 1(18) (2020): Heresy
Tomasz Peciakowski, Travelling Concepts or Phenomena? The Case of the “Intellectual” in the Social Sciences , Stan Rzeczy: No. 1(10) (2016): Travelling Concepts
Agnieszka Jelewska, Bits, Viruses, Networks. Three Cases of Polish New Art: Lisek/Brzeziński/Janicki , Stan Rzeczy: No. 1(4) (2013): The State of Art
Marcin Żółtowski, Bartosz Mika, The Epistemological and Political-Ideological Nature of Psychiatry in the Face of the Epidemic of Mental Diseases , Stan Rzeczy: No. 1(22) (2022): The Return of Metaphysics
Beata Koper, “Rest Cure” – The Nineteenth-Century Boredom Therapy of Silas Weir Mitchell in Charlotte Perkins Gilman’s Story “The Yellow Wallpaper” , Stan Rzeczy: No. 2(11) (2016): Boredom

1-10 of 80 Next

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.

[1] Bachelard G. 2002. Kształtowanie się umysłu naukowego: prz ycz ynek do psychoanaliz y wiedzy obiektywnej, tłum. D. Leszczyński, Słowo/Obraz Terytoria.

[2] Brissett D., Snow R. 1993. Boredom. Where the Future Isn’t, „Symbolic Interaction”, nr 16(3), s. 237–256.

[3] Donnelly K. 2014. On the Boredom of Science: Positional Astronomy in the Nineteenth Century, „The British Journal for the History of Science”, nr 47(3), s. 479–503.

[4] Drabik L. i in., red. 2008. Słownik języka polskiego PWN, Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.

[5] Feyerabend P. 1979. Ku pocieszeniu specjalisty, [w:] tegoż, Jak być dobrym empirystą?, tłum. K. Zamiara, Państwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe, s. 200– 250.

[6] Feyerabend P. 1985. Science in a Free Society, Verso.

[7] Heidegger M.1992. Die Grundbegriffe der Metaphysik: Welt – Endlichkeit – Einsamkeit, Vittorio Klostermann.

[8] Kierkegaard S. 1982. Albo – albo, t. 1, tłum. J. Iwaszkiewicz, Państwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe.

[9] Kuhn T. 2009. Struktura rewolucji naukowych, tłum. J. Nowotniak, Wydawnictwo Aletheia.

[10] Latour B., Woolgar S. 1986. Laboratory Life. The Construction of Scientific Facts, Princeton University Press.

[11] Latour B. 2003. Science in Action. How to Follow Scientists and Engineers through Society, Harvard University Press.

[12] Laudan L. 1977. Progress and its Problems. Towards a Theory of Scientific Growth, University of California Press.

[13] Laudan L. 1981. A Problem-solving Approach to Scientific Progress, [w:] Scientific Revolutions, red. I. Hacking, Oxford University Press, s. 144–155.

[14] Popper K. 1970. Normal Science and its Dangers, [w:] Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge, red. I. Lakatos, A. Musgrave, Cambridge University Press, s. 51–58.

[15] Popper K. 2002. Logika odkrycia naukowego, tłum. U. Niklas, Fundacja Aletheia.

[16] Schopenhauer A. 1994. Świat jako wola i przedstawienie, t. 1, tłum. Jan Garewicz, Wydawnictwo Naukowe PWN.

[17] Svendsen L. 2005. A Philosophy of Boredom, tłum. J. Irons, Reaktion Books.

[18] Toohey P. 2012. Historia nudy, tłum. K. Ciarcińska, Bellona.

[19] Traweek S. 1992. Beamtimes and Lifetimes. The World of High Energy Physicists, Harvard University Press.