On Interpretative Activity: A Peircian Approach to the Interpretation of Science, Technology, and the Arts
Graduate studies at Western
|Abstract||This article has no associated abstract. (fix it)|
|Keywords||Interpretation (Philosophy Philosophy and science Art Philosophy|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Buy the book||$62.95 used (46% off) $70.00 new (40% off) $120.00 direct from Amazon Amazon page|
|Call number||B824.17.B68 2006|
|External links||This entry has no external links. Add one.|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Joseph Schillinger (1948). The Mathematical Basis of the Arts. New York, Philosophical Library.
Peter K. Machamer & Gereon Wolters (eds.) (2010). Interpretation: Ways of Thinking About the Sciences and the Arts. University of Pittsburgh Press.
Gordon Belot (1996). Why General Relativity Does Need an Interpretation. Philosophy of Science 63 (3):88.
Chuanfei Chin (2011). Models as Interpreters (with a Case Study From Pain Science). Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 42 (2):303-312.
Stein Haugom Olsen (2004). Modes of Interpretation and Interpretative Constraints. British Journal of Aesthetics 44 (2):135-148.
H. Radder (1997). Philosophy and History of Science: Beyond the Kuhnian Paradigm. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 28 (4):633-655.
A. P. (1998). The Scope of Hermeneutics in Natural Science. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 29 (2):273-298.
Don Ihde (2004). Has the Philosophy of Technology Arrived? A State‐of‐the‐Art Review. Philosophy of Science 71 (1):117-131.
Nicholas Maxwell (2003). Art as Its Own Interpretation. In Andreea Ruvoi (ed.), Interpretation and Its Objects: Studies in the Philosophy of Michael Krausz. Rodopi.
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
Added to index2009-01-28
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?