Bookbot

Synthese Library: The Justification of Scientific Change

Parameters

  • 136bladzijden
  • 5 uur lezen

Meer over het boek

This book explores the justification of scientific change, focusing on various forms of invariance. It examines concepts of observation, meaning, and regulative standards, positioning itself against several influential contemporary views. Recent revolutionary ideas in the philosophy of science have emerged from thinkers like Feyerabend, Hanson, Kuhn, and Toulmin. While their perspectives differ, I emphasize their shared belief in pervasive presuppositions fundamental to scientific inquiry. Each argues that shifts between scientific traditions necessitate radical changes in observation, term meanings, and metastandards, advocating for total replacement rather than reduction during scientific revolutions. I contend that their arguments for radical variance in observation, meaning, and standards fail, and I find these positions both implausible and methodologically problematic. Instead, I propose an account of scientific change that retains the strengths of radical meaning variance theorists while addressing their shortcomings.

Een boek kopen

Synthese Library: The Justification of Scientific Change, Carl R. Kordig

Taal
Jaar van publicatie
1975
Bindwijze
(Hardcover),
Staat van het boek
Beschadigd
Prijs
€ 6,89

Betaalmethoden

Nog niemand heeft beoordeeld.

Titel
Synthese Library: The Justification of Scientific Change
Taal
Engels
Uitgever
Springer
Jaar van publicatie
1975
Formaat
Hardcover
Aantal pagina's
136
ISBN10
9027701814
ISBN13
9789027701817
Reeks
Aantekening
This book explores the justification of scientific change, focusing on various forms of invariance. It examines concepts of observation, meaning, and regulative standards, positioning itself against several influential contemporary views. Recent revolutionary ideas in the philosophy of science have emerged from thinkers like Feyerabend, Hanson, Kuhn, and Toulmin. While their perspectives differ, I emphasize their shared belief in pervasive presuppositions fundamental to scientific inquiry. Each argues that shifts between scientific traditions necessitate radical changes in observation, term meanings, and metastandards, advocating for total replacement rather than reduction during scientific revolutions. I contend that their arguments for radical variance in observation, meaning, and standards fail, and I find these positions both implausible and methodologically problematic. Instead, I propose an account of scientific change that retains the strengths of radical meaning variance theorists while addressing their shortcomings.