legal perdi todos os comentários do último artigo do Joseph Rouse...que fazia aqui
ok já passou...
 o título é Merleau-Ponty’s Existential Conception of Science
espero que esteja aqui em mim...


e tava tão interessante...mas, resumindo

Scientific theories can never be complete because
which features of the world require scientific description or
explanation depends on our cognitive and practical concerns. As our
concerns change, our theories must also change (consider what the
growing concern to understand weight relations did for and to chemical
theory in the eighteenth century). There cannot be an ideal scientific
theory any more than there can be an ideal map. There must
always be, Merleau-Ponty claimed, a “surplus of the signified over
the signifying” (PP 447/390/453).

that a world is present to us as a field
of truth and error, demands explanation. Why is it that some of our
exploratory stances and conceptions lead to illusion, and others do
not? What accounts for the difference between truth and error? Only
a realist account of the world, it is said, can explain this without
invoking miracles.16 Merleau-Ponty responded that such a demand
mistakenly places rationality outside of the world, outside of the
experiences in which it is manifest.
To say that there exists rationality is to say that perspectives blend, perceptions
confirm each other, a meaning emerges. But it should not be set in a
realm apart, transposed into Absolute Spirit or into a world in the realist
sense. . . . [T]he only preexistent Logos is the world itself . . . and no explanatory
hypothesis is clearer than the act whereby we take up this unfinished
world in an effort to complete and conceive it. (PP xv/xix–xx/xxii–xxiii)
Rationality is not a problem to be solved. Science can never be made
secure, if security must be found in the certainty of a given content.
The rationality of science, like all rationality, is contingent. It is to
be continually achieved, rather than secured once and for all. The
“unmotivated upsurge of the world” (PP viii/xiv/xv) is the point at
which both scientific and philosophical reflection begin and which
neither can transcend or explain.∗