A quantitative approach to evolution of music and philosophy

The development of new statistical and computational methods is increasingly making it possible to bridge the gap between hard sciences and humanities. In this study, we propose an approach based on a quantitative evaluation of attributes of objects in fields of humanities, from which concepts such as dialectics and opposition are formally defined mathematically. As case studies, we analyzed the temporal evolution of classical music and philosophy by obtaining data for 8 features characterizing the corresponding fields for 7 well-known composers and philosophers, which were treated with multivariate statistics and pattern recognition methods. A bootstrap method was applied to avoid statistical bias caused by the small sample data set, with which hundreds of artificial composers and philosophers were generated, influenced by the 7 names originally chosen. Upon defining indices for opposition, skewness and counter-dialectics, we confirmed the intuitive analysis of historians in that classical music evolved according to a master apprentice tradition, while in philosophy changes were driven by opposition. Though these case studies were meant only to show the possibility of treating phenomena in humanities quantitatively, including a quantitative measure of concepts such as dialectics and opposition, the results are encouraging for further application of the approach presented here to many other areas, since it is entirely generic.

The eagle and the starlings: Galileo's argument for the autonomy of science-how pertinent is it today?

After Galileo's argument for the autonomy of science is analysed and adapted to take into account later developments of scientific practices, we conclude that, in the final analysis, it is not compelling. Nevertheless, Galileo's argument still provides a useful point of reference, for aspects of it can be interpreted to anticipate central components of the often acclaimed ideal of science as value free, so that appraising it contributes to the larger purpose of exploring how well that ideal stands up today. Finally, we will argue that residue from Galileo's struggle with the Church remains with us, making it difficult to identify the conditions that would need to be put into place today for any robust sense of the autonomy of science to be defensible. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.