Bookbot

Synthese Library: The Justification of Scientific Change

Parametry

  • 136 stron
  • 5 godzin czytania

Więcej o książce

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.

Zakup książki

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

Język
Rok wydania
1975
Oprawa
(twarda),
Stan książki
Uszkodzony
Cena
30,59 zł

Metody płatności

Nikt jeszcze nie ocenił.

Tytuł
Synthese Library: The Justification of Scientific Change
Język
angielski
Wydawca
Springer
Rok wydania
1975
Oprawa
twarda
Liczba stron
136
ISBN10
9027701814
ISBN13
9789027701817
Seria
Opis
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.