Explore the latest books of this year!
Bookbot

Synthese Library: The Justification of Scientific Change

Parameters

  • 136 pages
  • 5 hours of reading

More about the book

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.

Book purchase

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

Language
Released
1975
Binding
(Hardcover),
Book condition
Damaged
Price
€6.89

Payment methods

No one has rated yet.

Title
Synthese Library: The Justification of Scientific Change
Language
English
Publisher
Springer
Released
1975
Format
Hardcover
Pages
136
ISBN10
9027701814
ISBN13
9789027701817
Series
Description
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.