Graduate studies at Western
Peter Achinstein (ed.)
Johns Hopkins University Press (2004)
|Abstract||Is there a universal set of rules for discovering and testing scientific hypotheses? Since the birth of modern science, philosophers, scientists, and other thinkers have wrestled with this fundamental question of scientific practice. Efforts to devise rigorous methods for obtaining scientific knowledge include the twenty-one rules Descartes proposed in his Rules for the Direction of the Mind and the four rules of reasoning that begin the third book of Newton's Principia , and continue today in debates over the very possibility of such rules. Bringing together key primary sources spanning almost four centuries, Science Rules introduces readers to scientific methods that have played a prominent role in the history of scientific practice. Editor Peter Achinstein includes works by scientists and philosophers of science to offer a new perspective on the nature of scientific reasoning. For each of the methods discussed, he presents the original formulation of the method selections written by a proponent of the method together with an application to a particular scientific example and a critical analysis of the method that draws on historical and contemporary sources. The methods included in this volume are Cartesian rationalism with an application to Descartes' laws of motion Newton's inductivism and the law of gravity two versions of hypothetico-deductivism -- those of William Whewell and Karl Popper -- and the nineteenth-century wave theory of light Paul Feyerabend's principle of proliferation and Thomas Kuhn's views on scientific values, both of which deny that there are universal rules of method, with an application to Galileo's tower argument. Included also is a famous nineteenth-century debate about scientific reasoning between the hypothetico-deductivist William Whewell and the inductivist John Stuart Mill and an account of the realism-antirealism dispute about unobservables in science, with a consideration of Perrin's argument for the existence of molecules in the early twentieth century|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Buy the book||$49.97 used (36% off) $69.27 new (11% off) $69.30 direct from Amazon (10% off) Amazon page|
|Call number||Q175.S4226 2004|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
A. Cornelius Benjamin (1960). Is the Philosophy of Science Scientific? Philosophy of Science 27 (4):351-358.
Kenneth F. Schaffner (1969). Correspondence Rules. Philosophy of Science 36 (3):280-290.
Nicholas Maxwell (1972). A Critique of Popper's Views on Scientific Method. Philosophy of Science 39 (2):131-152.
Gerald Doppelt (1990). The Naturalist Conception of Methodological Standards in Science: A Critique. Philosophy of Science 57 (1):1-19.
Thomas C. Leonard (2002). Reflection on Rules in Science: An Invisible-Hand Perspective. Journal of Economic Methodology 9 (2):141-168.
David B. Resnik (1993). Do Scientific Aims Justify Methodological Rules? Erkenntnis 38 (2):223 - 232.
Ralph M. Blake (1960/1989). Theories of Scientific Method: The Renaissance Through the Nineteenth Century. Gordon and Breach.
Peter Achinstein (1991). Particles and Waves: Historical Essays in the Philosophy of Science. Oxford University Press.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads91 ( #9,507 of 740,454 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,957 of 740,454 )
How can I increase my downloads?