Graduate studies at Western
Cambridge University Press (2004)
|Abstract||Joseph LaPorte argues that scientists have not discovered that sentences about natural kinds are true rather than false. Instead, scientists have found that these sentences were vaguely phrased in the language of earlier speakers and they have thus refined the meanings of the terms to validate the sentences. In the process, however, they have also changed the meaning of the terms. This book will appeal to students and professionals in the philosophy of science, the philosophy of biology and the philosophy of language.|
|Keywords||Biology Philosophy Essentialism (Philosophy|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Buy the book||$61.98 used (42% off) $90.25 new (15% off) $100.70 direct from Amazon (5% off) Amazon page|
|Call number||QH331.L29 2004|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Denis M. Walsh (2006). Evolutionary Essentialism. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 57 (2):425-448.
John S. Wilkins (forthcoming). Biological Essentialism and the Tidal Change of Natural Kinds. Science and Education.
Ingo Brigandt (2011). Philosophy of Biology. In Steven French & Juha Saatsi (eds.), The Continuum Companion to the Philosophy of Science. Continuum Press.
Evan Fales (1982). Natural Kinds and Freaks of Nature. Philosophy of Science 49 (1):67-90.
Rachel Cooper (2004). Why Hacking is Wrong About Human Kinds. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 55 (1):73-85.
Nigel Leary (2007). Natural Kinds: (Thick) Essentialism or Promiscuous Realism? Philosophical Writings 34:5 - 13.
Nigel Leary (2009). How Essentialists Misunderstand Locke. History of Philosophy Quarterly 26 (3):273-292.
David B. Kitts (1987). Plato on Kinds of Animals. Biology and Philosophy 2 (3):315-328.
Robert A. Wilson (2004). Review of Laporte on Natural Kinds. [REVIEW] Philosophy in Review 24:423-426.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads50 ( #25,084 of 738,079 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #37,045 of 738,079 )
How can I increase my downloads?