The discussion study takes as its starting point the thinking, which Professor Šmajs and others presented in Filosofický časopis 6, 2013 on evolutionary ontology. The author shows an enduring aspect of evolutionary ontology: ontology as the product of human culture attains to knowledge that has the seeming character of objective truth - it thus expresses the true nature of the ontic order of nature. This is not, however, the usual nonsense of inconsistent philosophy. The author of the text identifies as lying behind the step Kantian and Hegelian strategies which make possible this shift from the order of culture to the order of nature. These strategies are (i) a sign of the grounding of Professor Šmajs´ ideas in early-modern thinking; and (ii) they are the cause of a strongly anthropocentric attitude, which unwittingly influences the system of evolutionary ontology. At the end of the study, the author points to the fact that it would be more appropriate for evolutionary ontology if its proponents were able to give up their early-modern argumentative approach, and thus rid themselves of their strong anthropocentrism. In this way they would be able to avoid the conceptual conflict which makes evolutionary ontology "frozen" from within., Radim Šíp., and Obsahuje poznámky a bibliografii
Tato studie recenzuje knihu: Charles CAMIC - Neil GROSS - Michèle LAMONT (eds.), Social Knowledge in the Making. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2011, a zasazuje ji do kontextu současných úvah o proměnách výzkumné praxe sociálních věd, akademické kultury, stylů myšlení a psaní. Pokouší se analyzovat v knize ohlašovaný „obrat k praxi" a ukazuje, nakolik samotné výzkumné praktiky v sociálních vědách ovlivňuje neexistence „standardních" forem, způsobů či stylů bádání. Detailně jsou představeny rovněž výchozí myšlenky takzvané „nové" sociologie idejí, jež stojí v pozadí celého projektu analýzy sociálních praktik projevujících se v procesech „produkce, evaluace a aplikace" sociálního vědění. Jako klíčová se ukazuje potřeba nově promyslet samotnou koncepci „profesionalizované" sociální vědy, jež byla v dřívějším vývoji odmítnuta jako morálně i prakticky neudržitelná, neboť s demokratizací výzkumného procesu a proměnou vztahu mezi sociálními vědami a jejich publikem se stále zřetelněji projevuje, že s odklonem od konceptu profesionální sociální vědy se veřejná irelevance sociálního vědění spíše stále více prohlubuje., This study reviews the book: Charles CAMIC - Neil GROSS - Michèle Lamont (eds.), Social Knowledge in the Making. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2011, and puts it into the context of contemporary accounts of the changing practice of social science research, academic culture, styles of thinking and writing. It attempts to analyze the "turn to practice" heralded in the book and demonstrates how the actual research practices in the social sciences are af- fected by the absence of "standard" forms, methods or styles of research. The core ideas of the so-called "new" sociology of ideas, which is behind the whole project aiming at the analysis of social practices manifested in processes of the "production, evaluation and application" of social knowledge, are also presented in detail. It follows from the argument elaborated in this text that it seems inevitable to rethink the very concept of "professional" social science, which was rejected in an earlier development as morally and practically untenable, since the democratization of the research process and the transforma- tion of the relation between the social sciences and their audience(s) manifest more and more distinctly that with the departure from the concept of professional social science, the public irrelevance of social knowledge is more and more transparent and pervading., and Jan Balon.