Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T18:18:37.890Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Explanation in the Semantic Conception of Theory Structure

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 February 2022

Paul Thompson
Paul Thompson*
Affiliation:
University of Toronto
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The semantic conception of theories has a relatively short history the beginnings of which Frederick Suppe has traced to von Neumann (Suppe 1988). Two other early initiators and advocates were Evert Beth in 1948-49 (Beth 1948, 1949; see also 1961) and Patrick Suppes in 1957 in his Introduction to Logic (Suppes, 1957). Beth advanced what has become known as a state space approach while Suppes advanced a set-theoretical predicate approach.

Suppes suggested that scientific theories are more appropriately formalized as set-theoretical predicates. Shortly thereafter in 1961 Robert Stoll in his Set Theory and Logic (Stoll, 1961) made a similar claim about the formalization of informal theories of which scientific theories are instances. Suppes wrote a number of papers during the 1960's in which he indicated the features of theories that were better represented on a set-theoretical predicate conception of theories (see, for example Suppes, 1962).

Type
Part IX. Biology
Information
PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association , Volume 1988 , Issue 2: Volume Two: Symposia and Invited Papers 1988 , 1988 , pp. 286 - 296
Copyright
Copyright © 1989 by 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.)

References

Beatty, J. (1980a), “Optimal-Design Models and the Strategy of Model Building in Evolutionary Biology” Philosophy of Science 47:532–561.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beatty, J. (1980b), “What's Wrong with the Received View of Evolutionary Theory?” In Asquith, P.D. and Giere, R.N. (eds.) PSA 1980, vol. 2, East Lansing: Philosophy of Science Association.Google Scholar
Beatty, J. (1987), “On Behalf of the Semantic View,” Biology and Philosophy 2: 17–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beth, E. (1948), Natuurphilosophie Gorinchem: Noorduyn.Google Scholar
Beth, E. (1949), “Towards an Up-to-Date Philosophy of the Natural Sciences,” Methodos 1: 178–185.Google Scholar
Beth, E. (1961), “Semantics of Physical Theories,” in Freudenthal, H. (ed.) The Concept and the Role of the Model in Mathematics and Natural and Social Sciences Dordrecht: Reidel, pp. 48–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lack, D. (1947), Darwin's Finches: An Essay on the General Biological Theory of Evolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lloyd, E. (1983), “The Nature of Darwin's Support for the Theory of Natural Selection,” Philosophy of Science: 50:112–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lloyd, E. (1984), “A Semantic Approach to the Structure of Population Genetics,” Philosophy of Science 51:242–264.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lloyd, E. (1986), “Thinking about Models in Evolutionary Theory,” Philosophica 37:87–100.Google Scholar
Lloyd, E. (1987), “Confirmation of Ecological and Evolutionary Models,” Biology and Philosophy 2: 277–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenberg, A. (1981), “The Interaction of Evolutionary and Genetic Theory,” in Sumner, L.W., Slater, J.G. and Wilson, F.F. (eds.) Pragmatism and Purpose: Essays Presented to Thomas Goudge Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
Rosenberg, A. (1985), The Structure of Biological Science Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenberg, A. and Williams, M. (1986), “Discussion of Fitness as Primitive and Propensity,” Philosophy of Science 53: 412–418.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ruse, M. (1973), The Philosophy of Biology, London: Hutchinson & Co. Ltd.Google Scholar
Ruse, M. (1977), “Is Biology Different from Physics?” in Colodny, R. (ed.) Logic, Laws, and Life Pittsburgh: Pittsburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Schaffner, K.F. (1969), “Correspondence Rules” Philosophy of Science 36: 280–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sneed, J. (1971), The Logical Structure of Mathematical Physics. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stegmuller, W. (1976), The Structure and Dynamics of Theories. New York: Spring-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stoll, R.R. (1963), Set Theory and Logic. San Francisco: W.H. Freeman and Co.Google Scholar
Suppe, F. (1967), On the Meaning and Use of Models in Mathematics and the Exact Sciences. Ann Arbor: University Microfilms International (Ph.D. Dissertation).Google Scholar
Suppe, F. (1972a), “Theories, their Formulations, and the Operational Imperative,” Synthese 25: 129–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suppe, F. (1972b), “What's Wrong with the Received View on the Structure of Scientific Theories?” Philosophy of Science 39:1–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suppe, F. (1974), “Theories and Phenomena,” In Leinfellner, W., and Kohler, E., (eds.), Development in the Methodology of Social Science. Dordrecht: Reidel, pp. 45–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suppe, F. (1976), “Theoretical Laws,” in Prezlecki, M., Szaniawski, K. and Wojcicki, R., Formal Method in the Methodology of Empirical Science, Wroclaw: Ossolineum.Google Scholar
Suppe, F. (1979a), The Structure of Scientific Theories 2nd ed. Urbana: The University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
Suppe, F. (1979b), “Theory Structure” in Asquith, P.D. and Kyburg, H.E. Jr., (eds.) Current Research in the Philosophy of Science East Lansing: Philosophy of Science Association.Google Scholar
Suppe, F. (1988), The Semantic Conception of Theories and Scientific Realism. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
Suppes, P. (1957), Introduction to Logic. Princeton: Van Nostrand.Google Scholar
Suppes, P. (1962), “Models of Data,” in Nagel, E., Suppes, P. and Tarski, A. (eds.) Logic, Methodology and Philosophy of Science: Proceedings of the 1960 International Congress Stanford: Stanford University Press, pp. 252–261.Google Scholar
Suppes, P. (1968), “The Desirability of Formalization in Science,” Journal of Philosophy 65: 651–664.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, P. (1983), “The Structure of Evolutionary Theory: A Semantic Approach,” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 14: 215–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, P. (1985), “Sociobiological Explanation and the Testability of Sociobiological Theory,” in Fetzer, J.H. (ed.) Sociobiology and Epistemology Dordrecht: D. Reidel, pp. 201–215.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, P. (1986), “The Interaction of Theories and the Semantic Conception of Evolutionary Theory,” Philosophica 37: 73–86.Google Scholar
Thompson, P. (1987), “A Defense of the Semantic Conception of Evolutionary Theory,” Biology and Philosophy 2: 26–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, P. (1988a), “The Conceptual Role of Intelligence in Human Sociobiology,” in Jerison, H.J. and Jerison, I.L. (eds.) Intelligence and Evolutionary Biology New York: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
Thompson, P. (1988b), “Logical and Epistemological Aspects of the ‘New’ Evolutionary Epistemology,” Canadian Journal of Philosophy 14 (supplementary):235–253.Google Scholar
Thompson, P. (1989), The Structure of Biological Theories. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
van Fraassen, B.C. (1970), “On the Extension of Beth's Semantics of Physical Theories,” Philosophy of Science, 37: 325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Fraassen, B.C. (1972), “A Formal Approach to Philosophy of Science,” in Colodny, R.E. (ed.) Paradigms and Paradoxes, Pittsburgh: The University of Pittsburgh Press.Google Scholar
van Fraassen, B.C. (1980), The Scientific Image. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Fraassen, B.C. (1981), “Theory Construction and Experiment: An Empiricist View,” in Asquith, P.D. and Giere, R.N. (eds.) PSA 1980 vol. 2, East Lansing: Philosophy of Science Association, pp. 663–677.Google Scholar
Williams, M.B. (1970), “Deducing the Consequences of Evolution,” Journal of Theoretical Biology, 29: 343–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, M.B. (1973a), “Falsifiable Predictions of Evolutionary Theory,” Philosophy of Science 40: 518–537.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, M.B. (1973b), “The Logical Status of Natural Selection and Other Evolutionary Controversies,” in Bunge, M. (ed.) The Methodological Unity of Science, Dordrecht: D. Reidel.Google Scholar
Williams, M.B. (1982), “The Importance of Prediction Testing in Evolutionary Biology,” Erkenntnis 17: 291–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar