Theoria 11 (3):19-31 (1996)
|Abstract||This paper presents aprevalent representation about the objectivity and impartiality of scientific knowledge that emerges from the structure and style of the standard research paper. This representation is critically examined considering some rather untypical scientific papers reporting controversies between researchers in a certain field of experimental science. The role of personal preconceptions and intellectual prejudices in the assessment of scientific theories is emphasized by reference to Einsteinls grounds for his general theory of relativity|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Luca Consoli (2006). Scientific Misconduct and Science Ethics: A Case Study Based Approach. Science and Engineering Ethics 12 (3).
Dimitri Ginev (2009). From Existential Conception of Science to Hermeneutic Phenomenology of Scientific Research. Journal of Philosophical Research 34:365-389.
Jonathan Cohen & Callender Craig (2006). There is No Special Problem About Scientific Representation. Theoria 55 (1):67-85.
Thomas Nickles (1980). Scientific Problems: Three Empiricist Models. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1980:3 - 19.
Kristin Shrader-Frechette (2006). Comparativist Philosophy of Science and Population Viability Assessment in Biology: Helping Resolve Scientific Controversy. Philosophy of Science 73 (5):817-828.
Michela Massimi (2004). Non‐Defensible Middle Ground for Experimental Realism: Why We Are Justified to Believe in Colored Quarks. Philosophy of Science 71 (1):36-60.
Martin Carrier & J. (1990). The Unity of Science. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 4 (1):17-31.
Craig Callender & Jonathan Cohen (2006). There is No Special Problem About Scientific Representation. Theoria 21 (1):67-85.
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?