Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T18:44:55.103Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Naturalized Philosophy of Science, History of Science, and the Internal/External Debate

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 January 2023

Bonnie Tamarkin Paller
Bonnie Tamarkin Paller*
Affiliation:
California State University, Northridge
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

Philosopherd have long stressed a distinction between theory justification and theory discovery based on a belief that justification and discovery are essentially different processes. What makes these two processes essentially different, it was assumed, is that the process of justification is guided by criteria which are expressable as rules, while the processes involved in discovery are not rule-guided. Moreover and perhaps more importantly, it was assumed that tha rules for justification are discoverable a priori by rationalistic logical analysis but an account of discovery, whatever it turns out to be like, will be describable only a posteriori.

Type
Part IV. General Philosophy Of Science (A)
Information
PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association , Volume 1986 , Issue 1: Volume One: Contributed Papers 1986 , 1986 , pp. 258 - 268
Copyright
Copyright © Philosophy of Science Association 1986

References

Basalla, G. (ed.). (1968). The Rise of Modern Science: External or Internal Factors. Lexington: D.C. Heath and Co.Google Scholar
Dobbs, B.J.T. (1975). The Foundations of Newton’s Alchemy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Dobbs, B.J.T. (1982). “Newton’s Alchemy and His Theory of Matter.” Isis 73(269): 511–528.Google Scholar
Hacking, I. (ed.). (1981). Scientific Revolutions. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kuhn, T. (1970). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. 2nd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Lakatos, I. (1971). “History of Science and Its Rational Reconstructions.” In PSA 1970. (Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science, Volume 8.) Edited by R. Buck and R.S. Cohen. Dordrecht: Reidel. Pages 91-135. (As reprinted in Hacking (1981). Pages 107-127.)Google Scholar
McGuire, J.E. and Rattansi, P.M (1966). “Newton and the Pipes of Pan.” Notes and Records of the Royal Society of London 21(2): 108–143.Google Scholar
Mulkay, M. (1979). Science and the Sociology of Knowledge. London: Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
Newton, Sir Isaac (1687). Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica. London Royal Society. (As reprinted as Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy, (trans.) A. Motte, revised by F. Cajori. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1931.)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Newton, Sir Isaac (1704). Opticks. London William Innys.Google Scholar
Nickles, T. (ed.). (1984). Scientific Discovery: Case Studies. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.Google Scholar
Popper, K. (1935). Logik der Forsohung. Wein: J. Springer. (As reprinted as The Logic of Scientific Discovery. London: Hutchinson, 1959.)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Righini-Bonelli, M.L. and Shea, W. (eds.). (1975). Reason, Experiment, and Mysticism. New York: Science History Publications.Google Scholar
Shapere, D. (1984). Reason and the Search For Knowledge. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.Google Scholar
Vickers, B. (ed.). (1984). Occult and Scientific Mentalities in the Renaissance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Westfall, R. (1975). “The Role of Alchemy in Newton’s Career.” In Righini-Bonelli and Shea (1975). Pages 189-232.Google Scholar
Westfall, R. (1980). Never at Rest. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Westfall, R. (1984). “Newton and Alchemy.” In Vickers (1984). Pages 315-335.CrossRefGoogle Scholar