David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal for General Philosophy of Science 43 (1):93-103 (2012)
The very idea of a general philosophy of science relies on the assumption that there is this thing called science—as opposed to the various individual sciences. In this programmatic piece I make a case for the claim that general philosophy of science is the philosophy of science in general or science as such. Part of my narrative makes use of history, for two reasons. First, general philosophy of science is itself characterised by an intellectual tradition which aimed to develop a coherent philosophical view of science, qua a part of culture with distinctive epistemic features and a distinctive relation to reality. But, second, this tradition went through some important conceptual shifts which re-oriented it and made it more sensitive to the actual development of science itself. The historical narrative focuses on three such moments: the defining moment, associated with Aristotle, and two major conceptual turns, related to Kant and Duhem. The pressures on the very idea of a general philosophy of science that followed the collapse of the macro-models of science that became popular in the 1960s, the pressures that lay all of the emphasis on fragmentation and not on integration, can be dealt with by a new synthesis within general philosophy of science of the constitutive and the historical, in light of the intellectual tradition that has defined it.
|Keywords||Philosophy of science History of science Unity Aristotle Duhem Kant|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
Aristotle (1994). Posterior Analytics. Clarendon Press.
Ernst Cassirer (1923/2003). Substance and Function. Dover Publications.
Ernst Cassirer (1950). The Problem of Knowledge. New Haven, Yale University Press.
Pierre Maurice Marie Duhem (1954). The Aim and Structure of Physical Theory. Princeton, Princeton University Press.
Immanuel Kant (2004). Metaphysical Foundations of Natural Science. Cambridge University Press.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
P. D. Magnus (2013). Philosophy of Science in the Twenty-First Century. Metaphilosophy 44 (1-2):48-52.
Steve Fuller (2012). The Art of Being Human: A Project for General Philosophy of Science. [REVIEW] Journal for General Philosophy of Science 43 (1):113-123.
Nicholas Maxwell (1977). Articulating the Aims of Science. Nature 265 (January 6):2.
Roger Ariew (1986). Descartes as Critic of Galileo's Scientific Methodology. Synthese 67 (1):77 - 90.
Paul Thagard (2009). Why Cognitive Science Needs Philosophy and Vice Versa. Topics in Cognitive Science 1 (2):237-254.
ron Kaldis (2009). Oakeshott on Science as a Mode of Experience. Zygon 44 (1):169-196.
Martin W. Bauer, Rajesh Shukla & Nick Allum (eds.) (2011). The Culture of Science: How the Public Relates to Science Across the Globe. Routledge.
Klaus Hentschel (2003). Der Vergleich AlS Brücke Zwischen Wissenschaftsgeschichte Und Wissenschaftstheorie. Journal for General Philosophy of Science 34 (2):251-275.
Klaus Fischer (1995). Braucht Die Wissenschaft Eine Theorie? Journal for General Philosophy of Science 26 (2):227 - 257.
John Losee (1987). Philosophy of Science and Historical Enquiry. Oxford University Press.
John Wettersten (2005). Popper's Historical Role: Innovative Dissident. [REVIEW] Journal for General Philosophy of Science 36 (1):119 - 133.
Added to index2012-02-28
Total downloads68 ( #21,704 of 1,102,846 )
Recent downloads (6 months)13 ( #14,578 of 1,102,846 )
How can I increase my downloads?