In this article, I argue that the work of Bruno Latour has straddled two conflicting intellectual traditions: relativism 20th-century postmodernism (which deconstructed realist pretensions scientism) and realism 21st-century New Materialism seeks to sublate postmodern linguistic turn embrace science alongside critical theory). connect these twin tendencies their ancient precursors among Greek s...

in this article, after reviewing the difference between fundamentalist and anti-fundamentalist philosophy, the features of the rationality will be explained from the perspective of five anti-fundamentalist philosophers (habermas, richard rorty, macintyre, michel foucault and hayek). the common point stated by all these philosophers is that they all criticize metaphysics and doubt about the basi...

This article takes up the onto-theological critique of metaphysics and questions whether onto-theology is not something to evade or overcome, but is inevitable. Consequently, it furthers the exploration of onto-theology by asking, if it is inevitable, then what comes after onto-theology? For the past half-century, onto-theology has been a central concern for philosophy, particularly in phenomen...

A historian of 20 century philosophy of science that were to consider the recent renaissance of studies on the ontological status of spacetime would certainly notice a significant shift of interest toward metaphysical issues previously scorned by neopositivists philosophers. Some philosophers more inclined toward historical analysis have complained about the audacious tendency of some contempor...

Quantum theory has been proved as an outstanding mystery in modern science. The predictions of science have turned out to be probabilistic. The principle of determinism has failed. For systems like weather, earthquakes, rolling dices etc... and of course human behaviour it has proved impossible, for science, to describe a state of the system accurately for a long time into the future. Moreover,...

We are pluralists about logical consequence [1]. We hold that there is more than one sense in which arguments may be deductively valid, that these senses are equally good, and equally deserving of the name deductive validity. Our pluralism starts with our analysis of consequence. This analysis of consequence is not idiosyncratic. We agree with Richard Jeffrey, and with many other philosophers o...