Off-campus access
Using PhilPapers from home?
Click here to configure this browser for off-campus access.
- J. Agassi (1959). Epistemology as an Aid to Science: Comments on Dr Buchdahl's Paper. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 10 (38):135-146.
Similar books and articles
Philip Kitcher has advanced an epistemology of science that purports to be naturalistic. For Kitcher, this entails that his epistemology of science must explain the correctness of belief-regulating norms while endorsing a realist notion of truth. This paper concerns whether or not Kitcher's epistemology of science is naturalistic on these terms. I find that it is not but that by supplementing the account we can secure its naturalistic standing.
At a time when the international dialogue surrounding development is focused on increasing the quantity of aid, this paper focuses on how the donor community can improve the quality of foreign assistance. The author discusses the problem of project proliferation, and the tendency of developing countries who receive aid to become overburdened by the costs of administering aid projects. Using a sophisticated mathematical modeling process, the author analyzes the relationship between total aid and recipient activity, and the distribution of projects by size. The conclusions hold insights for policy-makers: when projects proliferate beyond a certain point, the effective marginal utility of aid declines sharply, and can even become negative. This negative effect of aid on development can be especially true if the aid delivery process drifts away from the goal of poverty reduction. In practice, therefore, the author suggests that when countries reach their absorptive capacity, aid dollars given beyond that point lose much of their effectiveness. This paper is part of the Center for Global Development's ongoing work on aid effectiveness. To learn more about the potential negative effect of aid on development, and specifically institution-building, read Working Paper 71, "Fiscal Implications of Large Aid Increases.".
No categories
Several philosophers have questioned the possibility of a genetic epistemology, an epistemology concerned with the developmental transitions between successive states of knowledge in the individual person. Since most arguments against the possibility of a genetic epistemology crucially depend upon a sharp distinction between the genesis of an idea and its justification, I argue that current philosophy of science raises serious questions about the universal validity of this distinction. Then I discuss several senses of the genetic fallacy, indicating which sense of ‘genesis’ is relevant to epistemology. Next I consider the objection that psychology is irrelevant to epistemology, and that since "genetic epistemology" is really psychology, "genetic epistemology" is irrelevant to a real epistemology. Finally, I take up the objection that nothing discovered in genetic psychology could be relevant to a genetic epistemology. These last two arguments are based upon what I claim to be a mistaken notion of the nature of psychology. Suitably interpreted, psychology can assist genetic epistemology precisely in the way that the history of science assists current philosonhv of science. *I owe considerable thanks to Jann Benson, Ken Freeman, Bernie Rollin and Ron Williams for their helpful discussions concerning many of the issues discussed in this paper. I also wish to thank David Hamlyn, John Heil, William Lycan, Harvey Siegel and an anonymous reviewer for their comments and suggestions. It goes without saying that none of these individuals (especially Hamlyn and Siegel) necessarily agree with me. An earlier version of this paper was read at Colorado State University where the audience's comments were beneficial.
Gerd Buchdahl's international reputation rests on his masterly writings on Kant. In them he showed how Kant transformed the philosophical problems of his predecessors and he minutely investigated the ways in which Kant related his critical philosophy to the contents and methods of natural science. Less well known, if only because in large part unpublished, are the writings in which Buchdahl elaborated his own views on the methods and status of the sciences. In this paper I examine the roles of hermeneutics in Buchdahl's reconstruction of Kant's philosophical system and in his own 'transcendental methodological' approach to the philosophy of science. The first section looks at Buchdahl's views on the theory and practice of historical interpretation and at the Husserlian hermeneutic scheme of reduction and realisation that he used in his later accounts of the philosophies of science of Kant and himself. The second section concentrates on Buchdahl's treatment of the grounds of science in Kant; and the third on the hermeneutic strategies Buchdahl employed in articulating and justifying his own views. The paper closes with reflections on the impact and importance of Buchdahl's interpretation of Kant's critical philosophy in relation to the sciences and of his own hermeneutically based philosophy of science.
Discussion of J. Agassi, Epistemology as an aid to science: Comments on dr Buchdahl's paper
|
|
There are no threads in this forum |
Nothing in this forum yet.

