Are there rival, incommensurable theories?
Philosophy of Science 46 (2):244-262 (1979)
| Abstract | Following an account of the incommensurability argument, an objection, based on assumptions concerning rival theories, is examined and rejected. This rejection leads to an alternative direction of criticism of incommensurability, a direction that involves the articulation of comparative standards of theory evaluation that are independent of meaning invariance | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | ||||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,631 |
| External links |
 |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesBradley Armour-Garb (2007). Consistent Inconsistency Theories. Inquiry 50 (6):639 – 654.
John D. Greenwood (1990). Two Dogmas of Neo-Empiricism: The "Theory-Informity" of Observation and the Quine-Duhem Thesis. Philosophy of Science 57 (4):553-574.
David Pearce (1984). Research Traditions, Incommensurability and Scientific Progress. Journal for General Philosophy of Science 15 (2):261-271.
J. N. Hattiangadi (1971). Alternatives and Incommensurables: The Case of Darwin and Kelvin. Philosophy of Science 38 (4):502-507.
Maria Caamaño (2009). A Structural Analysis of the Phlogiston Case. Erkenntnis 70 (3):331 - 364.
Marcel Weber (2002). Incommensurability and Theory Comparison in Experimental Biology. Biology and Philosophy 17 (2).
S. K. Arun Murthi & Sundar Sarukkai (2009). Multisemiosis and Incommensurability. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 23 (3):297-311.
Harold I. Brown (1983). Incommensurability. Inquiry 26 (1):3 – 29.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2009-01-28Total downloads5 ( #160,171 of 548,969 )Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #37,438 of 548,969 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
