| dc.description.abstract | The article begins with the critique of the neopositivist classification of sciences and concludes with a
presentation of an improved classification. In the critical part it is shown that the neopositivist classification
of sciences into empirical and formal sciences is double- faulted: firstly, there are no formal sciences, and thus
mathematics does not consist of analytic propositions, secondly, physics - treated as the most developed empirical
science - is not “empirical” in the sense that is commonly assigned to the word. It is argued that there exist two
traditions of empirical research: one is connected with medicine and was first codified by Aristotle; the other
appeared with the ancient astronomy and was described by Plato in Timaeus. The above-mentioned remarks allow not
only to reject the neopositivist classification, but also to construct a much better classification based on
Plato’s idea. | en_EN |
