David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
The attempt to formulate a viable empiricist and non-foundationalist epistemology of science faces four problems here confronted. The first is an apparent loss of objectivity in science, in the conditions of use of models in applied science. The second derives from the theory-infection of scientific language, with an apparent loss of objective conditions of truth and reference. The third, often cited as objection to The Scientific Image, is the apparent theory-dependence of the distinction between what is and is not observable. The fourth and last is the loss of the possibility of objective evaluation of rationality in scientific methodology. It is argued that each of these problems is illusory
|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
O. Bueno (1997). Empirical Adequacy: A Partial Structures Approach. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 28 (4):585-610.
F. A. I. Buekens & F. A. Muller (2012). Intentionality Versus Constructive Empiricism. Erkenntnis 76 (1):91-100.
J. Brakel (1996). Interdiscourse or Supervenience Relations: The Primacy of the Manifest Image. Synthese 106 (2):253 - 297.
Similar books and articles
Ricki Bliss (2013). Viciousness and the Structure of Reality. Philosophical Studies 166 (2):399-418.
Bas C. Van Fraassen (1992). From Vicious Circle to Infinite Regress, and Back Again. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1992:6 - 29.
Anna-Sofia Maurin, Infinite Regress - Virtue or Vice? Hommage à Wlodek.
Ali Hasan (2011). Classical Foundationalism and Bergmann's Dilemma for Internalism. Journal of Philosophical Research 36:391-410.
S. Weber (2011). Does Schmidt's Process-Orientated Philosophy Contain a Vicious Infinite Regress Argument? Constructivist Foundations 7 (1):34-35.
Daniel Howard-Snyder & E. J. Coffman (2006). Three Arguments Against Foundationalism: Arbitrariness, Epistemic Regress, and Existential Support. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 36 (4):535-564.
Dan Zahavi (2004). Time and Consciousness in the Bernau Manuscripts. Husserl Studies 20 (2):99-118.
Jonathan L. Kvanvig (1986). The Confusion Over Foundationalism. Philosophia 16 (3-4):345-354.
David Shatz (1983). Foundationalism, Coherentism, and the Levels Gambit. Synthese 55 (1):97 - 118.
Thomas Oberdan (1998). The Vienna Circle's 'Anti-Foundationalism'. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 49 (2):297-308.
Dirk-Martin Grube (1995). Religious Experience After the Demise of Foundationalism. Religious Studies 31 (1):37 - 52.
Laurence BonJour & Ernest Sosa (2003). Epistemic Justification: Internalism Vs. Externalism, Foundations Vs. Virtues. Blackwell Pub..
John Turri (2009). On the Regress Argument for Infinitism. Synthese 166 (1):157 - 163.
Added to index2010-12-22
Total downloads114 ( #14,742 of 1,699,596 )
Recent downloads (6 months)4 ( #161,079 of 1,699,596 )
How can I increase my downloads?