Peirce’s Classification of the Sciences

Abstract

<p>Charles Peirce’s classification of the sciences was designed shortly after the turn of the twentieth century. The classification has two main sources of inspiration: Comte’s science classification and Kant’s theoretical philosophy. Peirce’s classification, like that of Comte, is hierarchically organised in that the more general and abstract sciences provide principles for the less general and more concrete sciences. However, Peirce includes and assigns a superordinate role to philosophical disciplines which analyse and provide logical, methodological and ontological principles for the specialised sciences, and which are based on everyday life experience. Moreover, Peirce recognises two main branches of specialised empirical science: the natural sciences, on the one hand, and the social sciences, the humanities and psychology on the other. While both branches share logical and methodological principles, they are based on different ontological principles in studying physical nature and the human mind and its products, respectively. Peirce’s most basic philosophical discipline, phenomenology, transforms his early engagement with Kant. Peirce’s classification of aesthetics, ethics and logic as normative sub-disciplines of philosophy relate to his philosophical pragmatism. Yet his more overarching division between theoretical (philosophical and specialised) sciences and practical sciences may be seen as problematic. Taking Peirce’s historical account of scientific developments into consideration, however, I argue that his science classification and its emphasis on the interdependencies between the sciences could be seen as sustaining and supporting interdisciplinarity and interaction across fields of research, even across the divide between theoretical and practical sciences. </p>

Classification of Sciences and Systematization of Knowledge for the General and Professional Integrative Education Content Design

“…Эта универсальность человека позволяет нам рассматривать его как наиболее убедительное основание для дифференциации наук по его свойствам и для интеграции знаний о взаимосвязях человека с миром его бытия, то есть с объектами природы, общества, вещественного и духового мира. Близкие по смыслу идеи сегодня встречаются в работах как отечественных, так и зарубежных авторов (Lektorsky, 2004;Midtgarden, 2020).…”

How localized are computational templates? A machine learning approach

“…2 Peirce, for example, varies Comte's classification by separating science of discovery, of review, and practical science. See Midtgarden (2020) for an overview. 3 See Humphreys (2002, p. 5), from whom the present investigation takes its starting point.…”