Journal for General Philosophy of Science 26 (1):25 - 34 (1995)
|Abstract||Several lines of argument support the notion that the legacy of positivism (if cast in terms of the realist/instrumentalist debate) is more realist than not. Work by Joia Lewis and Alberto Coffa on both Schlick and Carnap is cited, and contemporary work from Van Fraassen and Boyd briefly alluded to. Note is made of the differences within contemporary realist theory, and it is included that Carnap's essay "Empiricism, Semantics and Ontology" is crucial for resolution of the debate. In closing it is noted that the spirit of much of the original positivist work reinforced the contention than those who work within the framework of science do in fact accept the reality of key scientific entities|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
J. C. P. Oliveira (2007). Carnap, Kuhn, and Revisionism: On the Publication of Structure in Encyclopedia. Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 38 (1):147 - 157.
Tom Campbell (2004). Prescriptive Legal Positivism: Law, Rights and Democracy. Cavendish Publishing.
J. C. Pinto de Oliveira, Carnap, Kuhn, and Revisionism (II): On "Structure" and the Philosophical Change.
Jaegwon Kim (2003). Logical Positivism and the Mind-Body Problem. In Logical Empiricism: Historical & Contemporary Perspectives. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.
Alan W. Richardson & Thomas E. Uebel (2005). The Epistemic Agent in Logical Positivism. Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 79:73 - 105.
Jane Duran (2005). Realism, Positivism and Reference. Journal for General Philosophy of Science 36 (2):401 - 407.
Joia Lewis (1988). Schlick's Critique of Positivism. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1988:110 - 117.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads5 ( #160,428 of 549,128 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,361 of 549,128 )
How can I increase my downloads?