PREFACE ln every-day activities in science and the humanities we very often compare and evaluate hypotheses, theories, and whole disciplines. ...

In the article two questions are considered: does science study values, and is science valuable, or maby harmful. The anwser for the first question is positive: science must formulate normative statements, especially in methodology. The second problem is more complicated. The author points out that the anwser depends on the previously accepted hierarchy of values.

The paper contains introductory remarks and is conceived of as a part of a larger project. First of all decisions are made as to the choice of an adequate concept of philosophy (which does not exclude other concepts of this field of interest). Among others philosophy as a very general domain of considerations is contrasted to logic and mathematics. Methods for philosophy are described in the way the natural sciences do it: methods are schemes for repeatable actions which in similar (...) circumstances result in similar or identical outcomes irrespective of the philosopher's (the performer's) views. Philosophers very often neglect repeatability and similarity of effects. Kazimierz Twardowski's method of the elimination of contradiction (cf. his paper „On the so-called relative truths”) is put forward as a paragon of further important methods of philosophy. (shrink)

In the first part of the paper three concepts of system are introduced. The first is the following ordered set: S = , where S is a given system, C is the set of its parts, R1, ..., Rk are relations between these parts, Rk+1, ..., Rk+m are relations between parts of S and its environment U. This concept does not take into account the fact that real things change. Thus it is the concept of abstract system. The second concept (...) takes changes of systems for granted. At every period i the system is slightly different. At the periods i Si is a set of sections of a real system: Si = , where {C}i is the set of sets of parts of S, {R1, ..., Rk}i and {Rk+1, ..., Rk+m}i are sets of relations. Different sections of a system are similar; the same holds for the relations and the subsequent environments. To describe the evolution of systems these similarity-relations have to be considered. Let the relations between the C's, the parts of the system, be symbolized as X, the similarity relations between the {R1, ..., Rk} pointed to by T, and the relations between the other sets of relations marked by Z. Let W be asigned to the relations between the succesive environments. SI is a system which lasts during the period I and changes in this time. The period I is in fact identical with i. The symbol SI was introduced to point to the relations S, T, Z, W, which were absent in the definition of Si. Now we have the following third concept of system: SI = . In the second part of the paper the relation X is analysed, when C consists of statements and S is a theory. The relation is to the effect that statements of later stages of a theory refer to n-tuples which exhibit more arguments that the relation spoken of at earlier stages of the theory. (shrink)