Ragnar Fjelland

Stilling: professor

Telefon: 55 58 32 35

E-post: Ragnar.Fjelland@svt.uib.no

Besøksadresse: Allegt. 34

Vitenskapsfilosofi, vitenskapsteori, naturvitenskapenes vitenskapsteori, vitenskapsetikk, forskningsetikk, teknologifilosofi, forholdet mellom vitenskap og teknologi, helsefagenes vitenskapsteori, vitenskapelig usikkerhet, kompleksitet

Publikasjoner i Cristin

Viktigste faglige artikler, internasjonalt:

Natur und instrumentelle Vernunft, in D. Böhler, T.
Nordenstam andG. Skirbekk (eds.): Die pragmatische Wende,
Frankfurt aM: Suhrkamp Verlag 1987: 239-258.

The theory-ladenness of observations, the role of scientific
instruments, and the Kantian a priori, International Studies
in the Philosophy of Science, Vol 5 (1991), No 3: 269-280.

R. Fjelland and E. Gjengedal: A Theoretical Foundation for Nursing as a Science" ,
in Patricia Benner (ed.): Interpretive
Phenomenology. Embodiment, Caring, and Ethics in Health and
Illness, Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications 1994: 3-25.

Strand, Fjelland, Flatmark: In vivo interpretation of in vitro
effect studies, Acta Biotheoretica 44/1996: 1-21.

From evolutionary epistemology to the life world a priori,
C. Bengt-Pedersen og N. Thomassen (eds.): Nature and lifeworld.
Theoretical and practical metaphysics, Odense University Press
1998.

Niels Bohr on Physics, Biology and Psychology, Teorie &
Modelli, n.s. 2001; VI(1): 87-101.

Facing the Problem of Uncertainty, Journal of Agricultural
and Environmental Ethics 2002; 15: 155-169.

The Copenhagen Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics and
Phenomenology, Babette Babich (ed.): Hermeneutic Philosophy of
Science, Van Gogh's Eyes, and God, Boston Studies in the
Philosophy of Science, vol 225, Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic
Publishers; 2002: 53-65

D. Chu (Gross), R. Strand and R. Fjelland: Theories of
Complexity. Common Denominators of Complex Systems, Complexity
2003, 8(3): 19--30.

Artikler og kapitler i bøker, norsk (utvalg):

Hva bør vi vite om vitenskap og teknologi?, Egil Kallerud and
Svein Sjøberg (eds.): Vitenskap, teknologi og allmenndannelse,
Norsk institutt for studier av forskning og utdanning, rapport
10/1997.

Kan genprosjektet forklare mennesket, Lars Haar and Dag E.
Helland (eds.): Genteknologi og det menneskelige, Bergen: Alma
Mater 1998.

Humaniora og naturvitenskap: C.P. Snows "to kulturer" i dagens
situasjon, K. E. Haug and B. Mæhlum (eds.): Myter og
humaniora, Oslo: Sypress Forlag 1998: 14--26.
Vitenskapelig usikkerhet som utfordring”, Knut W. Ruyter
(ed.): Forskningsetikk. Beskyttelse av enkeltpersoner og
samfunn, Oslo: Gyldendal Akademisk 2003: 255--271.

Geometrisering av tiden: forutsetninger og begrensninger,
Jan-Kyrre Berg Olsen (ed.): Tid - fysiske, filosofiske og
videnskapsteoretiske perspektiver, Frederiksberg C: Biofolia
2003: 19-43.

E. Gjengedal and R. Fjelland: Sanatoriets betydning for den
tuberkuløse pasientens livsverden, Jan Bengtsson (ed.): Ã…
forske i sykdom- og pleieerfaringer.
Livsverdensfenomebnologiske bidrag, Høyskoleforlaget 2006:
141-167.

R. Fjelland and E. Gjengedal: Livsverden, arkitektur og sykdom, Gjengedal, Schiøtz and Blystad (eds): Helse i rom og tid
Health in space and time”, Oslo: Cappelen Damm 2008: 99--124.

Bøker (utvalg):

Vitenskap som livssyn? Livssynsspørsmål i teknikkens tidsalder,
Oslo: Universitetsforlaget 1985

R. Fjelland and E. Gjengedal: Vitenskap på egne premisser. Vitenskapsteori og etikk for
helsearbeidere, Oslo: Ad Notam Gyldendal
1995.

Innføring i vitenskapsteori, Oslo: Universitetsforlaget 1999.

Vitenskap - mellom sikkerhet og usikkerhet, Oslo: Ad Notam
Gyldendal 1999.

"Universet er ikke slik det synes" Filosofi og
naturvitenskap i historisk perspektiv, Oslo:
Universitetsforlaget 2004

Ansvarlig for kurs i vitenskapsteori og etikk i forskerutdanningen ved Det matematisk-naturvitenskapelige fakultet (MNF 490)

Ansvarlig for kurset PHYS 210, Grunnlagsproblemer i fysikk (sammen med Ladislav Kocbach), ved Institutt for fysikk og teknologi.

Prosjekttittel: Newton and Goethe on reality and scientific method

Newton's work on light and color has had a tremendous historical influence, only surpassed by his work on mechanics. With some modifications and refinements (for example using wavelength instead of refrangibility) it is still the current theory of light and color.

Goethe was the first to offer a fundamental criticism of Newton's theory. Part of the criticism was that the theory could not adequately account for the way we perceive colors. According to Goethe a theory of color must be able to systematically describe color in all its aspects, variations and appearances: The colors of trees in a forest, of flowers and insects, the bright sky of daylight, the sky at dawn, shadows etc.

Although Goethe's theory of color is not taken seriously by many natural scientists, it is applied in the arts, and is generally regarded as giving a better account of how we see colors than Newton's theory. Therefore, if Goethe's theory is interpreted as solely a theory of color perception, or a guide for the artist in the uses of color, the theory is today uncontroversial.

However, Goethe did not restrict his criticism to Newton's account of color perception. He fundamentally disagreed with Newton's conception of reality and his approach to the study of nature. This part of Goethe's criticism has generally been regarded as a manifestation of his lack of understanding of essential aspects of modern science. Even his followers regarded this as a grave error of the great master, revealing a romantic, “pre-modern” conception of science.

This view of Goethe's conception of science is about to change, in view of recent trends in the development of the natural sciences. There has been a growing recognition of the fact that the modern scientific ideal has been too narrow, concentrating on the simple and either disregarding complex phenomena, or just assuming that they can be approached in the same way as simple phenomena. Keywords are “complexity” and “emergence”.

This project uses concepts of complexity to shed light on Goethe's theory of color, and will also show that Goethe's own theory can be improved by applying basic concepts from complexity theory (like order, emergence, holism etc.). At the same time it will be shown that elements of Goethe's theory (the relationship between subjective and objective, the role of the “observer”, the role of symmetries etc.) will offer valuable contributions to theories of complexity.

Prosjektet er blitt støttet økonomisk og er delvis utført ved Max Planck Institut für Wissenschaftsgeschichte i Berlin