Perspectives on Science 15 (3):359-390 (2007)
|Abstract||: This paper examines the debate in the late 19th and early 20th centuries over the acceptability of atomic and molecular physics. It focuses on three prominent figures: Maxwell, who defended atomic physics, Ostwald, who initially rejected it but changed his mind as a result of experiments by Thomson and Perrin, and Duhem, who never accepted it. Each scientist defended the position he did in the light of strongly held methodological views concerning empirical evidence. The paper critically evaluates each of these methodological positions|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Kristin Shrader-Frechette (2001). Radiobiological Hormesis, Methodological Value Judgments, and Metascience. Perspectives on Science 8 (4):367-379.
Robert C. Dunnell (1984). Methodological Issues in Contemporary Americanist Archaeology. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1984:717 - 744.
Andrew Crane (1999). Are You Ethical? Please Tick Yes □ or No □ on Researching Ethics in Business Organizations. Journal of Business Ethics 20 (3):237 - 248.
Manuel Bächtold (forthcoming). Saving Mach's View on Atoms. Journal for General Philosophy of Science.
Samia Hurst (2010). What 'Empirical Turn in Bioethics'? Bioethics 24 (8):439-444.
Warren Schmaus (1996). The Empirical Character of Methodological Rules. Philosophy of Science 63 (3):106.
Jutta Schickore (2011). The Significance of Re-Doing Experiments: A Contribution to Historically Informed Methodology. Erkenntnis 75 (3):325-347.
Bernd Hayo (1998). Simplicity in Econometric Modelling: Some Methodological Considerations. Journal of Economic Methodology 5 (2):247-261.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads28 ( #44,838 of 556,837 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #64,847 of 556,837 )
How can I increase my downloads?