Philosophy of Science 61 (4):592-607 (1994)
|Abstract||The underdetermination of theory by evidence must be distinguished from holism. The latter is a doctrine about the testing of scientific hypotheses; the former is a thesis about empirically adequate logically incompatible global theories or "systems of the world". The distinction is crucial for an adequate assessment of the underdetermination thesis. The paper shows how some treatments of underdetermination are vitiated by failure to observe this distinction, and identifies some necessary conditions for the existence of multiple empirically equivalent global theories. We consider how empiricists should respond to the possibility of such systems of the world|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
André Kukla (2001). Theoreticity, Underdetermination, and the Disregard for Bizarre Scientific Hypotheses. Philosophy of Science 68 (1):21-35.
Thomas Mormann (1995). Incompatible Empirically Equivalent Theories: A Structural Explication. Synthese 103 (2):203 - 249.
Husain Sarkar (2000). Empirical Equivalence and Underdetermination. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 14 (2):187 – 197.
P. D. Magnus (2005). Reckoning the Shape of Everything: Underdetermination and Cosmotopology. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 56 (3):541-557.
Ian McDiarmid (2008). Underdetermination and Meaning Indeterminacy: What is the Difference? Erkenntnis 69 (3):279 - 293.
John D. Norton (forthcoming). Must Evidence Underdetermine Theory. The Challenge of the Social and the Pressure of Practice:17--44.
Dana Tulodziecki (2012). Epistemic Equivalence and Epistemic Incapacitation. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 63 (2):313-328.
Jarrett Leplin (1997). The Underdetermination of Total Theories. Erkenntnis 47 (2):203-215.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads30 ( #41,568 of 556,837 )
Recent downloads (6 months)4 ( #20,489 of 556,837 )
How can I increase my downloads?