Philosophy of Science 40 (3):360-372 (1973)
|Abstract||It is argued in this paper that the valid argument forms coming under the general heading of Demonstrative Induction have played a highly significant role in the history of theoretical physics. This situation was thoroughly appreciated by several earlier philosophers of science and deserves to be more widely known and understood|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Max Jammer (2006). Concepts of Simultaneity: From Antiquity to Einstein and Beyond. Johns Hopkins University Press.
Kent Bach (1992). Intentions and Demonstrations. Analysis 52 (3):140--146.
C. W. Kilmister (1994/2005). Eddington's Search for a Fundamental Theory: A Key to the Universe. Cambridge University Press.
Gordon Fraser (ed.) (2009). The New Physics for the Twenty-First Century. Cambridge University Press.
P. D. Magnus (2008). Demonstrative Induction and the Skeleton of Inference. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 22 (3):303 – 315.
Thomas Bonk (1997). Newtonian Gravity, Quantum Discontinuity and the Determination of Theory by Evidence. Synthese 112 (1):53-73.
Michela Massimi (2004). What Demonstrative Induction Can Do Against the Threat of Underdetermination: Bohr, Heisenberg, and Pauli on Spectroscopic Anomalies (1921–24). [REVIEW] Synthese 140 (3):243-277.
Declan Smithies (2011). What is the Role of Consciousness in Demonstrative Thought? Journal of Philosophy 108 (1):5-34.
Jonathan Bain (1998). Weinberg on QFT: Demonstrative Induction and Underdetermination. Synthese 117 (1):1-30.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads7 ( #142,281 of 722,813 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #60,541 of 722,813 )
How can I increase my downloads?