Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-v2bm5 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-12T14:03:45.155Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

I'd Love to Be a Naturalist—if Only I Knew What Naturalism Was

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2022

Lawrence Sklar
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Naturalists tell us to rely on what science tells about the world and to eschew aprioristic philosophy. But foundational physics relies internally on modes of thinking that can only be called philosophical, and philosophical arguments rely upon what can only be called scientific inference. So what, then, could the naturalistic thesis really amount to?

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 77 , Issue 5 , December 2010 , pp. 1121 - 1137
Copyright
Copyright © The Philosophy of Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

‡

Originally presented as the presidential address to the Philosophy of Science Association Meetings, Pittsburgh, 2008.

References

Heaviside, Oliver. 1894. Electromagnetic Theory. vol. 2. London: “The Electrician” Printing and Publishing.Google Scholar
Mach, Ernst. 1959. The Analysis of Sensations and the Relation of the Physical to the Psychical. New York: Dover.Google Scholar
Maxwell, James Clerk. 1954. Matter and Motion. New York: Dover.Google Scholar
Reichenbach, Hans. 1958. The Philosophy of Space and Time. New York: Dover.Google Scholar
Whittaker, Edmund. 1951. “The Relativity Theory of Poincaré and Lorentz.” In A History of the Theories of Aether and Electricity, vol. 2. New York: Harper & Bros.Google Scholar