Até meados da primeira metade do século XX, as narrativas históricas sobre o
desenvolvimento cientÃfico dividiram-se conforme as distintas ênfases dadas aos
seus objetos. De acordo com essa divisão, poder-se-ia denominar as narrativas de
“internas†(I) ou de “externas†(E). Nesse trabalho, procuro demonstrar como essa
divisão (I/E) relaciona-se diretamente com as análises filosóficas e sociológicas
desenvolvidas no mesmo perÃodo. Por meio da elucidação do posicionamento
teórico dos principais membros do CÃrculo de Viena, do posicionamento de Karl
Popper, de Karl Mannheim e de Robert Merton, proponho entender como se deu,
primordialmente, a divisão entre Internalismo e Externalismo. Por essa via, a
presente análise pretende expor o debate entre a Filosofia e a Sociologia,
produzido na primeira metade do Século XX, tendo por base a divisão entre o
contexto da descoberta e o contexto da justificativa
Until the first half oh the 20th
century, the historical narratives about the scientific
development were divided accordingly to the distinguished relevance that was
given to its subjects. According to this division, it was possible to denominate the
narratives as “interns†(I) or “externs†(E). In the present work, I intent to show
haw this division (I/E) is directly related with the philosophical and sociological
analysis developed in the same period. Through the explanation of the theoretical
position of the Vienna Circle’s main members, of Karl Popper’s position, Karl
Mannheim’s and Robert Merton’s, I intend to understand haw occurred, primarily,
the division between Internalism and Externalism (I/E). By the way, the present
analysis intends to present the debate between Philosophy and Sociology,
occurred in the first half of the 20th
century, based on the division between the
context of discovery and context of justification.
