BEGIN:VCALENDAR
PRODID:-//Grails iCalendar plugin//NONSGML Grails iCalendar plugin//EN
VERSION:2.0
CALSCALE:GREGORIAN
METHOD:PUBLISH
BEGIN:VEVENT
DTSTAMP:20260604T230048Z
DTSTART;TZID=America/Toronto:20181003T103000
DTEND;TZID=America/Toronto:20181003T120000
SUMMARY:Heidegger vs. Kuhn: Does Science Think?
UID:20260606T192817Z-iCalPlugin-Grails@philevents-web-bd7db559-gt5qm
TZID:America/Toronto
LOCATION:Philosophy Dept\, University of Western Ontario\, London\, Canada
DESCRIPTION:<p>In&nbsp\;<em>What is Called Thinking?</em>\, Heidegger provocatively says that: &ldquo\;Science does not think&rdquo\;. Unfortunately\, Heidegger does very little to explain this bold claim\, or explicitly articulate what he sees as the unthinking aspects of science. With that said\, I elucidate Heidegger&rsquo\;s controversial assertion by aligning Heidegger&rsquo\;s distinction between&nbsp\;<em>Gestell&nbsp\;</em>and&nbsp\;<em>Gelassenheit&nbsp\;</em>with Kuhn&rsquo\;s distinction between normal and revolutionary science. Briefly\, the idea is that the&nbsp\;<em>puzzle-solving&nbsp\;</em>of normal science\, much like the calculative activity that orders modern technology (<em>Gestell</em>)\, fails to ask what it means for scientific entities&nbsp\;<em>to be</em>. However\, the&nbsp\;<em>paradigm-testing&nbsp\;</em>of revolutionary science represents a releasement (<em>Gelassenheit</em>) from the practices and presuppositions of normal science such that it is able to ask about the&nbsp\;<em>being&nbsp\;</em>of scientific entities. In short\, revolutionary science thinks about the being of entities in a way that normal science does not.</p>
ORGANIZER;CN=Corey W. Dyck:
METHOD:PUBLISH
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR