Philosophy of Science 63 (3):229 (1996)
|Abstract||In line with the semantic conception of scientific theories, I develop an account of the intertheory relation of comparative structural similarity. I argue that this relation is useful in explaining the concept of verisimilitude and I support this contention with a concrete historical example. Finally, I defend this relation against the familiar charge that the concept of similarity is insufficiently objective|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Todd M. Bailey (2005). Rules Work on One Representation; Similarity Compares Two Representations. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 28 (1):16-16.
Joel J. Kupperman (2005). A New Look at the Logic of the ‘is’-‘Ought’ Relation. Philosophy 80 (3):343-359.
Gary Marcus (2005). Opposites Detract: Why Rules and Similarity Should Not Be Viewed as Opposite Ends of a Continuum. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 28 (1):28-29.
Daniel Schoch (2001). Dimensional Characterization in Finite Quasi-Analysis. Erkenntnis 54 (1):121-131.
Charles B. Cross (2008). Antecedent-Relative Comparative World Similarity. Journal of Philosophical Logic 37 (2):101-120.
Oscar Vilarroya (2005). In Search of Radical Similarity. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 28 (1):35-35.
Eva Feder Kittay (1982). The Creation of Similarity: A Discussion of Metaphor in Light of Tversky's Theory of Similarity. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1982:394 - 405.
W. V. Quine (2000). Three Networks. The Proceedings of the Twentieth World Congress of Philosophy 2000:287-291.
Beata Konikowska (1997). A Logic for Reasoning About Relative Similarity. Studia Logica 58 (1):185-226.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads9 ( #114,230 of 551,007 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,425 of 551,007 )
How can I increase my downloads?