David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal of Philosophical Logic 19 (4):429 - 451 (1990)
Recently several philosophers of science have proposed what has come to be known as the semantic account of scientific theories. It is presented as an improvement on the positivist account, which is now called the syntactic account of scientific theories. Bas van Fraassen claims that the syntactic account does not give a satisfactory definition of "empirical adequacy" and "empirical equivalence". He contends that his own semantic account does define these notations acceptably, through the concept of "embeddability", a concept which he claims cannot be defined syntactically. Here, I define a syntactic relation which corresponds to the semantic relation of "embeddability". I suggest that the critical differences between the positivist account and van Fraassen's account have nothing to do with the distinction between semantics and syntax
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|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
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Sebastian Lutz (2015). What Was the Syntax‐Semantics Debate in the Philosophy of Science About? Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 92 (1):n/a-n/a.
Steven French (2010). Keeping Quiet on the Ontology of Models. Synthese 172 (2):231 - 249.
Sebastian Lutz (2014). Generalizing Empirical Adequacy I: Multiplicity and Approximation. Synthese 191 (14):3195-3225.
Thomas Mormann (1995). Incompatible Empirically Equivalent Theories: A Structural Explication. Synthese 103 (2):203 - 249.
Similar books and articles
Alessandra Giorgi (2010). About the Speaker: Towards a Syntax of Indexicality. Oxford University Press.
Jesús P. Zamora Bonilla (2003). Meaning and Testability in the Structuralist Theory of Science. Erkenntnis 59 (1):47 - 76.
William J. Rapaport (2003). What Did You Mean by That? Misunderstanding, Negotiation, and Syntactic Semantics. Minds and Machines 13 (3):397-427.
Rolf Schock (1964). Contributions to Syntax, Semantics, and the Philosophy of Science. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 5 (4):241--289.
Steven French & James Ladyman (1999). Reinflating the Semantic Approach. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 13 (2):103 – 121.
Chris Barker & Pauline I. Jacobson (eds.) (2007). Direct Compositionality. Oxford University Press.
Brendan P. Minogue (1984). Van Fraassen's Semanticism. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1984:115 - 121.
Sebastian Lutz (2014). What's Right with a Syntactic Approach to Theories and Models? Erkenntnis (S8):1-18.
F. A. Muller (2005). The Deep Black Sea: Observability and Modality Afloat. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 56 (1):61-99.
Hans Halvorson (2012). What Scientific Theories Could Not Be. Philosophy of Science 79 (2):183-206.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads20 ( #158,997 of 1,777,936 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #205,717 of 1,777,936 )
How can I increase my downloads?