Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T05:54:11.893Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Some Metaphysical Presuppositions of Science

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 March 2022

Haig Khatchadourian
Haig Khatchadourian*
Affiliation:
Duke University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In order to determine what are the metaphysical presuppositions of science (if any), we have to first define the terms ‘presupposition’ and ‘metaphysics’ or ‘metaphysical’. We shall begin with the former.

Arthur Pap in his article Does Science Have Metaphysical Presuppositions? discusses two senses of the term. A presupposition may be (a) a necessary condition: p presupposes q, dt = p implies q, i.e. not-g implies not-p. (b) a premise or a rule (or a set of rules) of inference used in deriving a belief. Thus in this sense, p presupposes q means that if q were false, then the belief in p would cease to be grounded.

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 22 , Issue 3 , July 1955 , pp. 194 - 204
Copyright
Copyright © Philosophy of Science Association 1955

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.)

References

1. Bridgman, P. W. The Nature of Physical Theory, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1936.Google Scholar
2. Feigl, H. “Scientific Method Without Metaphysical Presuppositions”, Philosophical Studies, February 1954.10.1007/BF02223254CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3. Frank, P. Modern Science And Its Philosophy, Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1950.10.1063/1.3066935CrossRefGoogle Scholar
4. Lewis, C. I. An Analysis Of Knowledge And Valuation, La Salle, Illinois: The Open Court Publishing Company, First Edition, Second Printing, 1950.Google Scholar
5. Pap, A. “Does Science Have Metaphysical Presuppositions?”, Readings in The Philosophy Of Science, Edited by: Feigl, H. and Brodbeck, M., New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, Inc., 1953.Google Scholar
6. Russell, B. Human Knowledge, Its Scope And Limits, New York: Simon and Schuster, 1948.Google Scholar
7. Stevens, S. S. “Psychology And Science Of Science”, Readings in The Philosophy Of Science, Edited by: Wiener, P., New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1953.Google Scholar