Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-kw2vx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-12T10:37:31.986Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Values in Science

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 February 2022

Ernan McMullin
Ernan McMullin*
Affiliation:
University of Notre Dame
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Presidential Address
Information
PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association , Volume 1982 , Issue 2: Volume Two: Symposia and Invited Papers 1982 , 1982 , pp. 2 - 28
Copyright
Copyright © 1983 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

Agassi, Joseph. (1971). “Modified Conventionalism is More Comprehensive than Modified Essentialism.” In Schilpp, (1974). Pages. 693-696.Google Scholar
Carnap, Rudolf. (1932). “Überwindung der Metaphysik durch logische Analyse der Sprache.” Erkenntnis 2: 219-241. (As reprinted as “The Elimination of Metaphysics through Logical Analysis of Language.” (trans.) Arthur Pap. In Logical Positivism. Edited by Ayer, A.J.. Glencoe, III.: Free Press, 1959. Pages 60-81.Google Scholar
Carnap, Rudolf. (1950). “Empiricism, Semantics and Ontology.” Revue internationale de Philosophie 4: 20-40. (As reprinted in Meaning and Necessity. 2nd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1956. Pages 205-221.Google Scholar
Duhem, Pierre. (1908). : Essai sur la notion de théorie Phvsiaue de Piaton a Galilée. Paris: A. Hermann. (As reprinted as To Save the Phenomena: An Essay on the Idea of Physical Theory from Plato to Galileo, (trans.) E. Doland and C. Maschler. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1969.Google Scholar
Farley, John and Geison, Gerald. (1976). “Science, Politics, and Spontaneous Generation in 19th Century France: The Pasteur-Pouchet Debate.” Bulletin of'the History of Medicine 48: 161-198.Google Scholar
Graham, Loren. (1981). Between Science and Values. New York: Columbia.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hempel, Carl G. (1966). Philosophy of Natural Science. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Jeffrey, Richard. (1956). “Valuation and Acceptance of Scientific Hypotheses.” Philosophy of Science 23: 237-246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kovesi, Julius. (1967). Moral Notions. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Kuhn, Thomas. (1961). “The Function of Measurement in Modern Physical Science.” Isis 52: 161-190. (As reprinted in Kuhn, Thomas. The Essential Tension. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1977. Pages 178-224.Google Scholar
Kuhn, Thomas. (1962). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Kuhn, Thomas. (1977). “Objectivity, Value Judgment, and Theory Choice.” In The Essential Tension. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Pages 320-339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lakatos, Imre. (1970). “Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes.” In Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge. Edited by Lakatos, I. and Musgrave, A.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Pages 91-195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laudan, Larry. (1981). “William Whewell on the Consilience of Inductions.” In Science and Hypothesis. (University of Western Ontario Series In Philosophy of Science, Volume 19.) Dordrecht: Reidel. Pages 163-180.Google Scholar
Machamer, Peter. (1978). “Galileo and the Causes.” In New Perspectives on Galileo. (University of Western Ontario Series in Philosophy of Science, Volume 14.) Edited by Butts, R. and Pitt, J.. Dordrecht: Reidel. Pages 161-180.Google Scholar
McMullin, Ernan. (1976). “The Fertility of Theory and the Unit for Appraisal in Science.” In Essays in Honor of Imre Lakatos. (Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science, Volume 39.) Edited by Feyerabend, P. et al. Dordrecht: Reidel. Pages 395-432.Google Scholar
McMullin, Ernan. (1978a). “Philosophy of Science and it s Rational Reconstructions.” In Progress and Rationality in Science. (Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science, Volume 58.) Edited by Radnitzky, G. and Andersson, G.. Dordrecht: Reidel. Pages 221-252.Google Scholar
McMullin, Ernan. (1978b). Newton on Matter and Activity. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
McMullin, Ernan. (1982). “The Role of ‘Values’ in Understanding Science.” Hastings Center Report 12(6): 38-40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McMullin, Ernan. (1983). “Scientific Controversy and its Termination.” In Scientific Controversies. Edited by Kaplan, A. and Engelhardt, H.T.. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
McMullin, Ernan, (forthcoming). “The Case for Scientific Realism.” In Scientific Realism. Edited by Leplin, J.. Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Nagel, Ernest. (1961). The Structure of Science. New York: Harcourt, Brace.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Polanyi, Michael. (1958). Personal Knowledge. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Popper, Karl. (1934). Logik der Forschung. Vienna: Springer. (As reprinted as The Logic of Scientific Discovery. London: Hutchinson, 1959.Google Scholar
Popper, Karl. (1974). “Replies to My Critics.” In Schilpp, (1974). Pages 961-1197.Google Scholar
Putnam, Hilary. (1981). Reason. Truth and History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rudner, Richard. (1953). “The Scientist qua Scientist Makes Value-judgements.” Philosophy of Science 20: 1-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schilpp, Paul A., (ed.). (1974). The Philosophy of Karl Popper. (The Library of Living Philosophers. Volume 14, Book II.) LaSalle, III: Open Court.Google Scholar
Stevenson, Charles. (1949). “The Nature of Ethical Disagreement.” In Readings in Philosophical Analysis. Edited by Feigl, H. and Sellars, H.. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts. Pages 587-593.Google Scholar
Weber, Max. (1917). “Der Sinn der ‘Wertfreiheit’ der soziologischen und ökonomischen Wissenschaften.” Logos 7: 40-88. (As reprinted as “The Meaning of ‘Ethical Neutrality’ in Sociology and Economics.” In The Methodology of the Social Sciences, (trans.) Shils, E.A. and Finch, H.A.. Glencoe, IL: The Free Press, 1949. Pages 1-47.)Google Scholar