??? ????? ????? ???? (Neo-Kantian Philosophy of Science by M. Friedman)

?? ?? ??? ????(M. Friedmann)? ????? ??? ??? ?? ??????? ??? ????? ??. ?? ? ??? ?????????? ????? ?? ??? ????, ????? ??? ??? ????? ??? ???? ??? ?? ??. ??? ???? ??? ?? ??????? ??? ???? ? ??? ?? ???? ????? ??? ???? ????? ??. ??? ??? ??? ?? ????? ????? i) ??????? ?? ??? ??? ??? ?? ???, ii) ??? ?? ??????? ??? ?? ??, ??? ????? ??? ?? ??, ?????????? ?? ?? ?? ??? ?? ??????? ??? ????? ???? ??? ????? ????, iii) ???? ??? ? ??? ??? ??? ?? ??? ??? ????? ??? ???????? ???? ??? ????. ??? ????? ?? ????? ?? ?, ??????, ??? ???? ??? ???? ?? ?? ?????? ???? ???? ???? ?? ?? ?????? ????? ???? ????? ?? ????? ??. ??? ????? ????? ??? ?? ??? ????? ???? ?? ??? ?? ????? ?????? ??? ???? ?? ????????? ?? ???? ????? ?? ???? ??.

Recently, M. Friedman recommends that we revisit the works by ErnstCassirer, a leading member of the Marburg school of Neo-Kantianism inorder to solve the Kuhn¡¯s thesis of incommensurability and naturalisticholism. Yet, Cassirer¡¯s earlier ideas are rarely found when Friedmanintroduces the concept of relativized a priori, constructive coordinatingprinciples, and role of scientific philosophy of Neo-Kantianism. Theaim of this paper is twofold. First, it examines the possibility ofNeo-Kantian philosophy of science proposed by Friedman. Second, itcriticizes Friedman¡¯s failure to find a satisfactory philosophicalinterpretation of the development of modern mathematical sciencethrough the mixture of Kuhnian ideas with ideas from both thelogical-empiricist tradition and from Cassirer. Specifically, I will arguethat Friedman¡¯s misunderstanding of Cassirer¡¯s work has led to hisjudgment that Reichenbach¡¯s reinterpretation of Kantian epistemologyhas more relevance than that of Cassirer to our contemporary situationin the philosophy of science.