Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T06:16:50.953Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Plurality of Science

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 January 2023

Patrick Suppes
Patrick Suppes*
Affiliation:
Stanford University
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.

What I have to say falls under four headings: What is unity of science, unity and reductionism, the search for certainty, and the search for completeness.

To answer this initial question, I turned to the introductory essay by Otto Neurath for Volume 1, Part 1, of the International Encyclopedia of Unified Science. He begins this way:

Unified science became historically the subject of this Encyclopedia as a result of the efforts of the unity of science movement, which includes scientists and persons interested in science who are conscious of the importance of a universal scientific attitude.

The new version of the idea of unified science is created by the confluence of divergent intellectual currents. Empirical work of scientists was often antagonistic to the logical constructions of a priori rationalism bred by philosophico-religious systems; therefore, “empiricalizatlon” and “logicalization” were considered mostly to be in opposition—the two have now become synthesized for the first time in history (p. I).

Type
Part I. The Unity of Science – Plurality of Nature
Information
PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association , Volume 1978 , Issue 2: Volume Two: Symposia and Invited Papers 1978 , 1978 , pp. 2 - 16
Copyright
Copyright © 1981 Philosophy of Science Association

Footnotes

1

I am debted to Georg Kreisel for a number of penetrating criticisms of the first draft of this paper.

References

[1] Carnap, R. “Logical Foundations of the Unity of Science.” In International Encyclopedia of Unified Science, Volume 1, Part 1. Edited by Neurath, O. et al. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1938. Pages 42–62.Google Scholar
[2] Humphreys, P. Inquiries in the Philosophy of Probability: Randomness and Independence. Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, Stanford University, 1976. Xerox University Microfilms Publication No. 76-18774.Google Scholar
[3] Kant, Immanuel. Die metaphysischen Anfangsgründe der Naturwissenschaft 1786 (As reprinted as Metaphysical Foundations of Natural Science (trans.) Ellington, J. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1970. Pages 1-134).Google Scholar
[4] Kreisel, G. “Informal Rigour and Completeness Proofs.” In Problems in the Philosophy of Mathematics. Edited by Lakatos, I. Amsterdam: North-Holland, 1967. Pages 138–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[5] Neurath, O. “Unified Science as Encyclopedic Integration.” In International Encyclopedia of Unified Science, Volume 1, Part 1. Edited by Neurath, O. et al. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1938. Pages 1–27.Google Scholar
[6] Smith, B.H., and Kreutzberg, G.W. “Neuron-target Cell Interactions.” Neurosciences Research Program Bulletin 14(1976): 211–453.Google ScholarPubMed
[7] Suppes, P. “Models of Data.” In Logic. Methodology and Philosophy of Science: Proceedings of the 1960 International Congress. Edited by Nagel, E. et al. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press, 1962. Pages 252–261.Google Scholar
[8] Suppes, P. “Aristotle’s Concept of Matter and Its Relation to Modern Concepts of Matter.” Synthese 28(1974): 27–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[9] Wheeler, J.A. “Curved Empty Space-time as the Building Material of the Physical World: An Assessment.” In Logic, Methodology and Philosophy of Science: Proceedings of the 1960 International Congress. Edited by Nagel, E. et al. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press, 1962. Pages 361–374.Google Scholar