S’interroger sur la clef de lecture à assumer pour aborder l’interprétation et l’analyse du premier écrit de Kant,présuppose en même temps de se poser le problème du fil conducteur qui traverse toute la recherche philosophique et scientifique de Kant. La reconstruction systématique et archéologique de la recherche spéculative kantienne pourra donc révéler, déjà à partir des Gedanken, une étude entièrement finalisée à la poursuite [I.] d’une description systématique del’univers (comme connaissance ‘objective’ du monde extérieur et intérieur, materialiter e formaliter spectata) [II.] antécédemment déterminée (comme connaissance ‘subjective’, materialiter e formaliter spectata) [III.] selon la ligne programmatique propre à la Science ‘classique’.Un tel gain a donc permis : (1.) de révéler avant tout l’origine aristotélicienne de la querelle des forces vives ; (2.) de jeter une lumière nouvelle sur la première formation de la pensée de Kant, révélant en outre les sources kantiennes orthodoxes établies par l’historiographie philosophique (c’est-à-dire Descartes, Leibniz et Wolff) comme apparentes par rapport à la perspective assumée par le parcours kantien, davantage tourné quant à lui vers les problèmes ouverts de la mise en cause du modèle physique aristotélicien par Galilée et de ceux émergeant de la tentative d’unification systématique proposée par Newton ; (3.) de trouver enfin, dans la solution kantienne, la clef de voûte pour dépasser définitivement le dualisme épistémologique (d’où l’incongruité conséquente), aujourd’hui subsistante, entre le modèle einsteinien dans le continu et le modèle, discret et probabiliste, proposée par la Mécanique quantique. / Asking ourselves about the interpretative framework that we should adopt when we set out to read and examine Kant’s first oeuvre demands that we pose the preliminary question of whether a red thread recurs throughout Kant’s philosophical and scientific investigation. A reconstruction of Kant’s theoretical investigation reveals that Kant’s inquiry, beginning with the Gedanken, is entirely devoted to accomplish (I) a systematic description of the universe (understood as objective knowledge of the external and internal world, a knowledge that is viewed both materially and formally, materialiter and formaliter spectata); (II) an antecedently determined description of the universe (understood as subjective knowledge, a knowledge that is viewed both materially and formally, materialiter and formaliter spectata); and (III) a description of the universe that is carried out within the programmatic direction proper of ‘classic’ Science. Our research findings allowed us to (1) show that the question of ‘living forces’ has Aristotelian underpinnings; (2) shed new light on the first development of Kant’s thought and show that the orthodox Kantian sources (that is, Descartes, Leibniz e Wolf) depart from Kant’s philosophical project which was primarily concerned with the problems that resulted from the crisis of Aristotelian science due to Galileo’s contributions and Newton’s attempt at a systemic unification of nature; (3) finally, identify a Kantiansolution for overcoming the epistemological dualism (and the incompatibility thereof) between Einstein’s model of a continuum in nature and the Quantum Mechanical model that describes nature as discrete and probabilistic.

When Bertolt Brecht flees Nazi Germany in 1933 he spends fourteen years in exile where he writes some of his most significant works, among them, Leben des Galilei. In his Leben des Galilei, Brecht explores the relationship between the individual and society. Using the historical Galileo Galilei as context, Brecht elucidates the responsibility that scientists must accept for how their discoveries are put to use. With his Galilei figur, Brecht expresses his belief that scientific advancement should be employed for the societal advancement of the common person. Brecht wrote three versions of his Galilei work, each showing significant parallels to Brecht's experiences during the corresponding time period of his exile. This thesis will illustrate these parallels. It will first show that the Galilei thematic is to be found in the very first years of Brecht's exile. It then deals with the influences surrounding the writing of the first version while Brecht is in Denmark. The second part of the thesis focuses on Brecht's exile in America and the resulting second version of his Galilei work. Here, working with Charles Laughton on an English translation of the work, Brecht's Galilei undergoes a fundamental change. Brecht attempts to alter the positive perception of the first version's Galileo who cleverly outwits the Inquisition and secretly has his work the Discorsi smuggled out of Italy. Brecht now wants to portray Galileo as a traitor of the people, who missed his chance to help the common people overcome the suppression they were subjected to. This change is strongly influenced by Brecht's experiences in America and the dawning of the Atomic Age. The last section of the thesis deals with Brecht's return to Europe and the third version of Leben des Galilei written in East Berlin. This is a result of translating the American version into German and the addition of scenes and individual elements cut from the first version to make it more appropriate for American audiences. Brecht maintains and tries to heighten the negative portrayal of Galileo as traitor of the common people.

No description available.

Denna studie syftade till att vinna kunskap om hur elever i årskurs ett kan utveckla förståelse för några av naturvetenskapens karaktärsdrag. För att undersöka detta planerade, genomförde och analyserade jag en temadag innehållandes tre lektioner med en klass elever i årskurs ett. Varia­tionsteorin och det pragmatiska perspektivet enligt Dewey användes som teoretiskt ram­verk i studien. Eleverna fick ta del av utvalda karaktärsdrag för naturvetenskap genom explicit och reflektiv undervisning. Berättelsen om Galilei bildade en röd tråd genom temadagen och ska­pade en kontext som karaktärsdragen kunde relateras till. För att synliggöra elevernas be­skriv­ning av naturvetenskapens karaktär innan och efter undervisningen genomfördes ett förtest och ett eftertest. Resultatet visar att eleverna hade fått syn på nästintill samtliga karaktärsdrag för naturvetenskap som undervisats explicit. Naturvetenskapliga arbetsprocesser som erfarits ge­nom lektionsinnehållet hade de svårt att koppla ihop med naturvetenskapens karaktär. Om­råden som frambringade flest egna reflektioner hos eleverna var mänskliga aspekter av natur­vetenskap samt naturvetenskapens begränsningar. Sammanfattningsvis visar denna stu­die att elever i årskurs ett kan utveckla förståelse för åldersadekvata karaktärsdrag för natur­ve­tenskap och att en explicit och reflektiv undervisning gynnar förståelsen.

Tableau d’honneur de la Faculté des études supérieures et postdoctorales, 2010-2011 / Dans une perspective épistémocritique, notre étude entend montrer que, parce qu'ils procèdent tous deux de la même épistémè - une épistémè déterminée par la crise de l'interprétation qui sévit à leur époque -, les textes de Rabelais et de Galilée trouvent à s'éclairer l'un l'autre en certaines parts, et ce, malgré le fait qu'ils appartiennent à des champs distincts du savoir. S'étendant depuis le XVIe siècle jusqu'au siècle suivant, la crise de l'interprétation dont il est question comporte deux aspects majeurs : la révision des canons exégétiques de l'époque et le passage du commentaire à l'expérimentation. Pour se rattachés spécifiquement à l'un ou à l'autre de ces aspects de la crise, les textes de Rabelais et de Galilée confirment le commun rapport qu'ils entretiennent avec elle de même qu'avec l'épistémè qu'elle a su en partie déterminer. De là, la filiation épistémique desdits textes peut être posée. Elle se vérifie en observant l'usage significatif qu'ont fait Rabelais et Galilée de la fiction linguistique et du dialogue. Propres à l'épistémè qu'ils partagent, ces deux types d'usage constituent la base sur laquelle pourront être rapprochés, s'éclairer et se comprendre les textes de Rabelais et de Galilée.

This study investigated evidence of how students’ mental models of fundamental kinematic relations evolved (i.e., developed cognitively over time) as observed during an introductory course in calculus-based classical mechanics. The core of the curriculum is based on a claim known as Galileo’s principle of relativity. The course material comprised a standard sequence of topics in classical mechanics, reconfigured through a framework scaffolded from this principle. The research focused specifically on students’ mental models for the concept of velocity. Four instruments were developed and integrated into a suite of variegated tools for data collection. The suite probed indicators across diverse domains or modalities of mental processing: visual, quantitative, and verbal. Evidence of student mental models included student data derived from answers to multiple-choice questions, short written passages, symbolic computations, quantitative answers, pictorial sketches, and semi-structured interviews. A limiting model, or rubric, for approaching a comprehensive mental model for velocity coalesced after results from axial coding of sketches and interviews were considered in connection with the contingency tables made from short answer frequency counts and the Wilcoxon mean comparison of problem-solving tests. The rubric consisted of three identifiable tiers that ascended in cognitive sophistication. Statistically significant evidence was found for growth from the first to the second stage of this three-stage rubric for student velocity models. By the end of the semester, students showed increased capacity to treat velocity as a relation between two objects, rather than as a property of one object. Students typically developed a correct habit of demanding a second object when asserting velocity for a first. When provided with a second or reference object, many students demonstrated an acquired ability to adjust their conclusion for target velocity. Little to no statistically significant evidence was found, however, to suggest growth in student mental models from the second to the third stage of the three-stage rubric. In particular, the typical student mental model proved too fragile to manage problems involving a third moving object or a second dimension of space. Evidence was insufficient to indicate deliberate student distinction of the relational character of velocity from the relational quality of an interaction such as force. Across the visual and problem-solving domains, stage three difficulty was attributed to the mismanagement of arrows known as vectors. In the verbal domain, questions about three-object scenarios revealed conflation of velocity with force. In light of the data from all three domains, velocity vectors were considered in direct connection with force vectors. A cognitive connection between velocity vectors and force vectors was identified as a potential source of dissonance. The report of the study concludes by considering ways to scaffold the teaching of velocity vectors from the teaching of displacement vectors. The recommendation for improved physics pedagogy and future research involves increased visual, verbal, and quantitative emphases on velocity as a bearing, as distinct from an interaction.

No description available.

This dissertation questions the dominant role that analogies to painting have played in the critical reception of the Italian madrigal—especially its flagship technique, the madrigalism—and argues for a more historically sensitive approach to sixteenth-century discussions of music–text relations in that genre. This approach centers rhetoric, understood broadly to encompass theories of style and subject matter, emotional response, and fictional representation, as the primary field of study to which musicians turned in their efforts to theorize musical expression. In its final chapter, the dissertation suggests that this rhetorical saturation of discourse around madrigals also to some degree influenced the composing of madrigals. Chapter 1 traces the outlines of what I call the “Galileian critical tradition” between the publication of Vincenzo Galilei’s 1581 "Dialogo della musica antica, et ella moderna" and the present. This tradition is characterized by a tendency among writers to dismiss the madrigalism on expressive grounds and, as time passes, increasingly in visual terms. Returning to the sixteenth century, chapter 2 argues that the phrase “imitating the words” (imitare le parole), which was adopted by Galilei, Gioseffo Zarlino, and others in the mid- to late Cinquecento to describe those novel techniques for the musical representation of text commonly seen in madrigals, acquires an affective connotation, in addition to its descriptive meaning, when placed in the context of contemporaneous literary studies of imitation (mimesis), especially those stemming from the recovery of Aristotle’s "Poetics." This affective dimension of the imitation principle, first theorized by Aristotle but creatively elaborated by his Renaissance commentators, highlights the cognitive pleasure that humans, because of a natural affinity for imitation, take from fiction—a species of pleasure, I suggest, relevant to the musical practice that “imitating the words” names. Turning from pleasure to passion, chapter 3 makes a case for the presence of a “two-stage model for emotional arousal” (as I call it) in sixteenth-century Italian music theory. Surveying this model’s foundation in physiological, rhetorical, and natural-philosophical texts, I show how Zarlino adapted its principles to musical purposes in his 1558 "Istitutioni harmoniche" and then trace the afterlife of Zarlino’s theory across a number of texts, including both music theory treatises and an epic poem. Chapter 4, finally, analyzes a late Cinquecento madrigal cycle—the three settings in Giaches de Wert’s "Ottavo libro de madrigali a cinque voci" (1586) from the “Armida” episode of Torquato Tasso’s "Gerusalemme liberata" (1581)—as a series of musical “stimuli” for listener responses patterned on the theoretical discussions studied in chapters 2 and 3. In its attention to the close-knit relationship between the expressive qualities of Wert’s music and the emotions they invite, this chapter follows the example of the ancient rhetorical tradition and its sixteenth-century inheritance, which emphasize the role of human psychology in determining the orator’s art.

Made available in DSpace on 2017-07-10T18:26:29Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Luiz Antonio Brandt.pdf: 1067816 bytes, checksum: 69a6a677b5382a0454f7bbd9551ddd1f (MD5) Previous issue date: 2011-12-08 / Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior / In this thesis, we aim to conduct a study and reconstruction of the criticism that Galileo undertakes to physics and cosmology of Aristotle, and works as an anchor Sidereus Nuncius and First Day of Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems. The arguments developed by Italian physicist these works, consolidating the Copernican theory and revolutionize the way we study nature. For centuries, the Western conception of the universe was supported by the assumptions of cosmology of Aristotle. Aristotelian cosmology had as fundamental points the idea of the incorruptibility of the heavens, the earth and the immobility of a hierarchy of elements. For the peripatetic, the cosmos was finite and heterogeneous, and was divided into two distinct regions: the sublunary (terrestrial) and above the Moon (heavenly). The telescopic observations made by Galileo in 1609, showing craters and mountains on the moon and Jupiter's satellites, were in evidence against the heaven-earth dichotomy proposed by Aristotle. For it revealed "imperfections" in the heavenly bodies, and showed that not all the stars had their revolutions as the center of the Earth, the idea of asking the same centrality in the cosmos. Moreover, the break with Aristotelian cosmology destabilizing the very physics of Aristotle, whose explanation of the movements of bodies depended on the cosmological structure, since there were three types of moves, straight toward the center, straight away from the center and circular around the center, which required a motionless earth occupying the center of the cosmos. The idea of centrality and immobility of the Earth is therefore fundamental point of Aristotelian physics and cosmology. Most of the work of Galileo Galilei seems to think about a central objective: the defense of the Copernican theory. Since his public adhesion to the Copernicanism in 1610, in Sidereus Nuncius, until Dialogue published in 1632, the Pisan Phisycist sought to break with the assumptions of the Aristotle s natural philosophy which supported the geocentric conception. As a result, it is in First Day of Dialogue that, certainly, we could find a more systematic and focused effort against the Aristotelic conception of world and its main characteristic: the dissociation of the cosmos into two distinct regions, the celestial and sublunary. / Nesta dissertação, temos como objetivo realizar um estudo e reconstrução das críticas que Galileu empreende à física e à cosmologia de Aristóteles, tendo como âncora as obras Sidereus Nuncius e Primeira Jornada do Diálogo sobre os dois máximos sistemas do mundo. Os argumentos desenvolvidos pelo físico pisano nestas obras, consolidam a teoria copernicana e revolucionam a maneira de se estudar a natureza. Durante séculos, a concepção ocidental de universo esteve apoiada nos pressupostos da cosmologia de Aristóteles. A cosmologia aristotélica tinha como pontos fundamentais a ideia de incorruptibilidade do céu, de imobilidade da Terra e de uma hierarquia dos elementos. Para o peripatético, o cosmos era finito e heterogêneo, e se encontrava dividido em duas regiões distintas: a sublunar (terrestre) e a supralunar (celeste). As observações telescópicas realizadas por Galileu em 1609, ao mostrar crateras e montanhas na Lua, e satélites em Júpiter, constituíram-se em evidências contrárias à dicotomia céu-Terra proposta por Aristóteles. Pois revelavam imperfeições nos corpos celestes, e mostravam que nem todos os astros tinham como centro de suas revoluções a Terra, questionando a ideia de centralidade da mesma no cosmos. Além disso, a ruptura com a cosmologia aristotélica desestabilizava a própria física de Aristóteles, cuja explicação dos movimentos dos corpos dependia da estrutura cosmológica, uma vez que existiam três tipos de movimentos: retilíneo em direção ao centro, retilíneo se afastando do centro e circular em torno do centro, o que requeria uma Terra imóvel ocupando o centro do cosmos. A ideia de centralidade e imobilidade da Terra é, portanto, ponto fundamental da física e da cosmologia aristotélicas. Grande parte da obra de Galileu parece girar em torno de um objetivo central: a defesa da teoria copernicana. Desde a sua adesão pública ao copernicanismo em 1610, no Sidereus Nuncius, até o Diálogo publicado em 1632, o físico pisano buscou romper com os pressupostos da filosofia natural de Aristóteles que sustentavam a concepção geocêntrica. Com efeito, é na Primeira Jornada do Diálogo que poderemos encontrar um esforço mais sistemático e concentrado contra a concepção aristotélica de mundo e sua principal característica: a dualidade do cosmos.

No description available.