PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1976:12 - 24 (1976)
|Abstract||Arguments, suggested by readings of Durkheim and Kroeber, for the integrity and autonomy of social theory are examined. These arguments may be construed as closure arguments on domains of social events and of social facts. Causal closure, ontic closure, and several kinds of nomic and explanatory closure are distinguished. Discussion of the relations of various kinds of closure, integrity, autonomy, etc. under plausible assumptions concerning causation and explanation leads to the conclusion that (a) one main strand of the integrity arguments is defensible; (b) special ontological assumptions (ontic closure) are not necessary and are dubiously sufficient for autonomy. This general conclusion accords with the positions of the later Kroeber and of D. Kaplan, that integrity-autonomy is best considered a methodological, not an ontological issue--a matter of distinct levels of description and explanation, not distinct levels of reality.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Kevin McCain (2013). Two Skeptical Arguments or Only One? Philosophical Studies 164 (2):289-300.
E. J. Lowe (2000). Causal Closure Principles and Emergentism. Philosophy 75 (294):571-586.
Kile Jones (2008). The Causal Closure of Physics: An Explanation and Critique. World Futures 64 (3):179 – 186.
Carolyn McLeod (2005). How to Distinguish Autonomy From Integrity. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 35 (1):107 - 133.
Adam Leite, Skepticism, Sensitivity, and Closure, or Why the Closure Principle is Irrelevant to External World Skepticism.
James L. White (1991). Knowledge and Deductive Closure. Synthese 86 (3):409 - 423.
Michael Blome-Tillmann (2006). A Closer Look at Closure Scepticism. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 106 (3):381–390.
Jochen Briesen (2010). Reconsidering Closure, Underdetermination, and Infallibilism. Grazer Philosophische Studien 80:221-234.
Vadim V. Vasilyev (2009). The Hard Problem of Consciousness and Two Arguments for Interactionism. Faith and Philosophy 26 (5):514-526.
Vadim V. Vasilyev (2009). “The Hard Problem of Consciousness” and Two Arguments for Interactionism. Faith and Philosophy 26 (5):514-526.
Dylan Dodd (2012). Evidentialism and Skeptical Arguments. Synthese 189 (2):337-352.
Christopher W. Gowans (1984). Integrity in the Corporation: The Plight of Corporate Product Advocates. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 3 (1):21 - 28.
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
Added to index2011-05-29
Total downloads1 ( #291,125 of 722,745 )
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?