David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jonathan Jenkins Ichikawa
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Philosophy of Science 78 (3):353-375 (2011)
Nagel’s official model of theory-reduction and the way it is represented in the literature are shown to be incompatible with the careful remarks on the notion of reduction Nagel gave while developing his model. Based on these remarks, an alternative model is outlined which does not face some of the problems the official model faces. Taking the context in which Nagel developed his model into account, it is shown that the way Nagel shaped his model and, thus, its well-known deficiencies, are best conceived of as a mere by-product of his philosophical background.
|Keywords||Ernest Nagel Theory Reduction Bridge Laws Reductive Explanation|
|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
Paul M. Churchland (1985). Reduction, Qualia and the Direct Introspection of Brain States. Journal of Philosophy 82 (January):8-28.
C. A. Hooker (1981). Towards a General Theory of Reduction. Part I: Historical and Scientific Setting. Dialogue 20 (1):38-59.
John G. Kemeny & Paul Oppenheim (1956). On Reduction. Philosophical Studies 7 (1-2):6 - 19.
Paul K. Feyerabend (1966). Review: The Structure of Science. [REVIEW] British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 17 (3):237 - 249.
Citations of this work BETA
Sahotra Sarkar (2015). Nagel on reduction11For Discussions, in Some Cases Over Many Decades, Thanks Are Due to Jordi Cat, Alan Love, Ken Schaffner, Abner Shimony, John Stachel, and Bill Wimsatt. Comments by Participants of the Formal Epistemology and the Legacy of Logical Empiricism Workshop and the Audience at a Philosophy Department Seminar at the University of Sydney Were Also Useful. For Comments on Previous Drafts, Thanks Are Due to Justin Garson and Thomas Uebel. [REVIEW] Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 53:43-56.
Fabian Lausen (2014). Reductionism as a Research Directive. Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 45 (2):263-279.
Similar books and articles
Marie I. Kaiser (2012). Why It Is Time To Move Beyond Nagelian Reduction. In D. Dieks, W. J. Gonzalez, S. Hartmann, M. Stöltzner & M. Weber (eds.), Probabilities, Laws, and Structures. The Philosophy of Science in a European Perspective. Springer
Ausonio Marras (2002). Kim on Reduction. Erkenntnis 57 (2):231-57.
Ausonio Marras (2005). Consciousness and Reduction. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 56 (2):335-361.
Raphael van Riel (2010). Identity-Based Reduction and Reductive Explanation. Philosophia Naturalis 47 (1-2):183-219.
Kevin Morris (2009). Does Functional Reduction Need Bridge Laws? A Response to Marras. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 60 (3):647-657.
Steven Orla Kimbrough (1979). On the Reduction of Genetics to Molecular Biology. Philosophy of Science 46 (3):389-406.
Kenneth F. Schaffner (1967). Approaches to Reduction. Philosophy of Science 34 (2):137-147.
Michael Esfeld, Christian Sachse & Patrice Soom (2012). Marrying the Merits of Nagelian Reduction and Functional Reduction. Acta Analytica 27 (3):217-230.
Henk Zandvoort (1984). Lakatos and Nagel: A Fruitful Confrontation. Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 15 (2):299-307.
Emma Ruttkamp (2006). Reduction Revisited. South African Journal of Philosophy 25 (2):102-112.
Kenneth F. Schaffner (1993). Theory Structure, Reduction, and Disciplinary Integration in Biology. Biology and Philosophy 8 (3):319-347.
Added to index2011-06-02
Total downloads209 ( #16,630 of 1,902,528 )
Recent downloads (6 months)10 ( #93,601 of 1,902,528 )
How can I increase my downloads?