O objetivo central de nosso trabalho é analisar criticamente os aspectos centrais do modelo de historiografia da ciência proposto por Thomas Kuhn (1922-1996). Para alcançar este objetivo, começaremos o nosso exame com A estrutura das revoluções científicas (1962), que contém a primeira formulação mais completa sobre a estrutura de desenvolvimento da ciência, juntamente com o Posfácio de 1969. Em seguida, investigaremos alguns dos ensaios publicados nas coletâneas A tensão essencial (1977) e O caminho desde a estrutura (2000). Ao final da análise veremos que a historiografia de Kuhn tem como base o postulado da história real da ciência e os pressupostos da relação entre a história e a filosofia da ciência, da centralidade do paradigma, da pluralidade de leituras de texto e da relação entre história interna e externa da ciência. / The central aim of our work is to critically examine the central aspects of the historiography of science proposed by Thomas Kuhn (1922-1996). To achieve this goal, we will begin our examination with The structure of scientific revolutions (1962), which contains the first more complete formulation about the structure of scientific development, along with the Postscript of 1969. Then we will also investigate some essays in the collections The essential tension (1977) and The road since Structure (2000). After the analysis we realize that Kuhn\'s historiography is based on the postulate of the real history of science and the assumptions of the relationship between history and philosophy of science, the centrality of the paradigm, the plurality of readings of text and the relationship between internal and external history of science.

O objetivo central de nosso trabalho é analisar criticamente os aspectos centrais do modelo de historiografia da ciência proposto por Thomas Kuhn (1922-1996). Para alcançar este objetivo, começaremos o nosso exame com A estrutura das revoluções científicas (1962), que contém a primeira formulação mais completa sobre a estrutura de desenvolvimento da ciência, juntamente com o Posfácio de 1969. Em seguida, investigaremos alguns dos ensaios publicados nas coletâneas A tensão essencial (1977) e O caminho desde a estrutura (2000). Ao final da análise veremos que a historiografia de Kuhn tem como base o postulado da história real da ciência e os pressupostos da relação entre a história e a filosofia da ciência, da centralidade do paradigma, da pluralidade de leituras de texto e da relação entre história interna e externa da ciência. / The central aim of our work is to critically examine the central aspects of the historiography of science proposed by Thomas Kuhn (1922-1996). To achieve this goal, we will begin our examination with The structure of scientific revolutions (1962), which contains the first more complete formulation about the structure of scientific development, along with the Postscript of 1969. Then we will also investigate some essays in the collections The essential tension (1977) and The road since Structure (2000). After the analysis we realize that Kuhn\'s historiography is based on the postulate of the real history of science and the assumptions of the relationship between history and philosophy of science, the centrality of the paradigm, the plurality of readings of text and the relationship between internal and external history of science.

This thesis focuses on methodological possibilities of language as a basis for history of sociology. Current professional history of sociology takes predominantly the form of institutional studies characterized by an attention to social context of knowledge production. Language orientation provides an unutilized opportunity for intellectual history - a supposedly stale alternative of institutional tradition. Development of language-based history creates a methodological position close to approaches common in history of natural sciences. Critical analysis of metaphor studies in sociology serves as an example of risks and challenges of language focus which assists us with articulation of our own methodological position. Following studies of Ladislav Kvasz, historian of natural sciences, the thesis offers methodological apparatus adapted to sociology. Key feature of the presented tool is a capability to distinguish between three levels of language of sociological theory: data, models and theory. These levels differ in functions which they ascribe to corresponding language elements and rising language powers (to constitute new objects and to integrate the ones positioned below). Application of our method is illustrated by two examples. Cursory excursion into history of mathematics in sociology...

A presente Tese compreende uma análise de três componentes estreitamente relacionados do pensamento de Pierre Duhem (1861-1916), a saber, a historiografia da ciência, a filosofia da história e o método histórico. Na primeira parte, examinamos as relações essenciais estabelecidas entre o método histórico e a filosofia da história duhemianas. Na segunda, nossa atenção volta-se para o estudo de alguns aspectos da historiografia de nosso autor que têm sido negligenciados pela literatura secundária, em especial, a sua concepção das revoluções científicas. Acreditamos ser possível compor uma interpretação sintética que harmonize, sem incoerências, as afirmações que conduzem os comentadores a vê-lo como um continuísta estrito e, por outro lado, algumas passagens esquecidas que tendem a reforçar uma interpretação descontinuísta. / The present Thesis encompasses an analysis of three closely related components of Pierre Duhems thought, namely, the historiography of science, the philosophy of history and the historical method. In the first part, we examine the essential relationships established between the Duhemian historical method and his philosophy of history. In the second part, our attention turns to the study of some aspects of Duhems historiography that have been neglected by the secondary literature, particularly, the Duhemian conception of scientific revolutions. We believe that it is possible to compose a synthetic interpretation that harmonizes, without inconsistencies, on the one hand, the assertions of the French historian that led the commentators to see him as a strict continuist and, on the other hand, some other forgotten passages that tend to reinforce a discontinuist interpretation.

A presente Tese compreende uma análise de três componentes estreitamente relacionados do pensamento de Pierre Duhem (1861-1916), a saber, a historiografia da ciência, a filosofia da história e o método histórico. Na primeira parte, examinamos as relações essenciais estabelecidas entre o método histórico e a filosofia da história duhemianas. Na segunda, nossa atenção volta-se para o estudo de alguns aspectos da historiografia de nosso autor que têm sido negligenciados pela literatura secundária, em especial, a sua concepção das revoluções científicas. Acreditamos ser possível compor uma interpretação sintética que harmonize, sem incoerências, as afirmações que conduzem os comentadores a vê-lo como um continuísta estrito e, por outro lado, algumas passagens esquecidas que tendem a reforçar uma interpretação descontinuísta. / The present Thesis encompasses an analysis of three closely related components of Pierre Duhems thought, namely, the historiography of science, the philosophy of history and the historical method. In the first part, we examine the essential relationships established between the Duhemian historical method and his philosophy of history. In the second part, our attention turns to the study of some aspects of Duhems historiography that have been neglected by the secondary literature, particularly, the Duhemian conception of scientific revolutions. We believe that it is possible to compose a synthetic interpretation that harmonizes, without inconsistencies, on the one hand, the assertions of the French historian that led the commentators to see him as a strict continuist and, on the other hand, some other forgotten passages that tend to reinforce a discontinuist interpretation.

Diplomová práce Spor o pozitivismus v německé sociologii. Renáta Vondráková. 2012. Abstract The main theme of the work is the issue of positivism dispute, which is commonly referred to discussions that occurred in German sociology in the sixties. It was a debate between advocates of critical theory, which were Theodor W. Adorno and Jürgen Habermas, and the concept of critical rationalism of Karl R. Popper and Hans Albert. The discussion initially was confined to issues related to the logic of the social sciences, for many reasons, but rather applied to differences between the concepts and challenges of science from the perspective of both the above approaches. Also the description and discovery purposes and contexts that led to the overturning topic discussion are devoted to this work. The aim is to describe the external influences as widely as possible and how it affected the final understanding of the dispute, but also how well the positivism dispute turned the concepts of science in the following period. The first part is concerned with social and historical situation in which the dispute arose. Followed by an outline of key terms that in connection with a dispute likely occur, in fact it is the analysis of major issues. Emphasis is placed on a thorough description of the first two contributions to the...