From Popperian Science to Normal Science. Commentary on Sestini (2010).

Abstract This article has no associated abstract. (fix it)
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index Translate to english
 
Download options
PhilPapers Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 11,392
External links
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library
References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Citations of this work BETA
Similar books and articles
Maya J. Goldenberg (2011). A Response to Sestini's (2011) Response. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice 17 (5):1004-1005.
Jack C. Carloye (1985). Normal Science and the Extension of Theories. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 36 (3):241-256.
Neil Tennant (1985). Minimal Logic is Adequate for Popperian Science. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 36 (3):325-329.
Raphael Sassower (2005). Science and Culture. Philosophy of the Social Sciences 35 (4):499-508.
Joseph Agassi (1982). How Technology Aids and Impedes the Growth of Science. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1982:585 - 597.
Ian Slater (2000). Normative Naturalism and Popperian Views on Reduction. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 14 (3):325 – 326.
Analytics

Monthly downloads

Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.

Added to index

2011-10-05

Total downloads

0

Recent downloads (6 months)

0

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature


Discussion
Start a new thread
Order:
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.