Graduate studies at Western
Philosophy of Science 71 (5):1038-1047 (2004)
|Abstract||Philosophers frequently cite Dalton's chemical atomism, and its nineteenth century developments, as a prime example of inference to the best explanation. This was a controversial issue in its time. But the critics are dismissed as positivist‐inspired antirealists with no interest in explanation. Is this a reasonable assessment?|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Paul Needham (2004). When Did Atoms Begin to Do Any Explanatory Work in Chemistry? International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 18 (2 & 3):199 – 219.
Paul Needham (2008). Resisting Chemical Atomism: Duhem's Argument. Philosophy of Science 75 (5):921-931.
W. M. Goodwin (2008). Structural Formulas and Explanation in Organic Chemistry. Foundations of Chemistry 10 (2):117-127.
Joachim Schummer (2004). Editorial: Substances Versus Reactions. Hyle 10 (1):3 - 4.
A. T. Balaban (2005). Reflections About Mathematical Chemistry. Foundations of Chemistry 7 (3):289-306.
Rom Harré (2011). Do Explanation Formats in Elementary Chemistry Depend on Agent Causality? Foundations of Chemistry 13 (3):187-200.
Klaus Ruthenberg (2009). Paneth, Kant, and the Philosophy of Chemistry. Foundations of Chemistry 11 (2):79-91.
Paul Needham (2004). Has Daltonian Atomism Provided Chemistry with Any Explanations? Philosophy of Science 71 (5):1038-1047.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads4 ( #189,403 of 738,851 )
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?