16 found
Sort by:
  1. A. Polikarov (1998). A Draft for Unifying Controversies in Philosophy of Science. Journal for General Philosophy of Science 29 (2):225-244.
    The basic (negative and positive) methodological maxims of three currents of philosophy of science (logical empiricism, falsificationism, and postpositivism) are formulated. Many of these maxims (stratagems) are controversial, e.g., the stance about the nonsense of metaphysics, and that of its indispensability. The restricted validity of these maxims allows for their unification. Within the framework of most of them there may be a relationship of (synchronic, or diachronic) subordination of the contradicting desiderata. In this vein ten stratagems are formulated.
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. A. Polikarov (1995). Concerning the Integration of Sciences: Kinds and Stages. [REVIEW] Journal for General Philosophy of Science 26 (2):297 - 312.
    The detailed analysis allows to discern seven kinds of integration, namely: I₁ consisting in the synthesis of scientific disciplines from their elements, including disciplinary unification I₁; I₂ inclusion of a science in (reduction to) another, more general; I₃ - links between different sciences, especially establishing of common elements; I₄ - interdisciplines bridging various sciences; I₅ - combination of two (or more) disciplines into a new (complex) science; I₆ - a general approach to several domains or multidisciplinary unification; I₇ - transdisciplinary (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. A. Polikarov (1993). Is There an Incommensurability Between Superseding Theories? Journal for General Philosophy of Science 24 (1):127 - 146.
    According to the Incommensurability Thesis (IT) superseding scientific theories (paradigms) are incommensurable. Unlike many authors we do not discuss whether there is a relationship of this kind. We take for granted that this may be the case, and see the problem in the endeavour to establish the domain of validity of the IT. The notion incommensurability (Ic) is derivative from the concepts of scientific paradigm (P) and scientific revolution (R). There are several concepts of P, as well as various conceptions (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. A. Polikarov (1993). Is There an Incommensurability Between Superseding Theories? On the Validity of the Incommensurability Thesis. Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 24 (1):127 - 146.
    According to the Incommensurability Thesis (IT) superseding scientific theories (paradigms) are incommensurable. Unlike many authors we do not discuss whether there is a relationship of this kind. We take for granted that this may be the case, and see the problem in the endeavour to establish the domain of validity of the IT. The notion incommensurability (Ic) is derivative from the concepts of scientific paradigm (P) and scientific revolution (R). There are several concepts of P, as well as various conceptions (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Azarya Polikarov (1993). On Various Kinds of Scientific Revolution in Physics. Epistemologia 16:213-234.
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Asaria Polikarov (1989). Über den Charakter von Einstein philosophischen Realismus. Philosophia Naturalis 26 (1):135-158.
    No categories
    Translate to English
    |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Azaria Polikarov (1989). On the Nature of Einstein's Realism'. Epistemologia 12:277-304.
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. Dimiter Ginev & Asarja Polikarov (1988). The Scientification of Methodology of Science. Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 19 (1):18-27.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. Azari͡a Prizenti Polikarov (1983). Methodological Problems of Science: The Iteration Cycle: Science--Methodology of Science. Pub. House of the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences.
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. A. Polikarov (1980). On the Relation of the Philosophy and the Special Sciences. Filosoficky Casopis 28 (2):177-189.
    No categories
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. A. Polikarov (1974). The Divergent-Convergent Method—a Heuristic Approach to Problem-Solving. In R. S. Cohen & Marx W. Wartofsky (eds.), Methodological and Historical Essays in the Natural and Social Sciences. Boston,Reidel. 211--233.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. Azaria Polikarov (1974). Determinism in Physics. Russian Studies in Philosophy 13 (1):67-85.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  13. Azarya Polikarov (1974). The Divergent-Convergent Method. In R. S. Cohen & Marx W. Wartofsky (eds.), Methodological and Historical Essays in the Natural and Social Sciences. Boston,Reidel. 4--213.
    No categories
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  14. Azari͡a Prizenti Polikarov (1973). Science and Philosophy. Sofia,House of the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences.
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  15. A. Polikarov (1968). Philosophie und physik in den Ost-europäischen ländern Von. In Raymond Klibansky (ed.), Contemporary Philosophy. Firenze, la Nuova Italia. 2--232.
    No categories
    Translate to English
    |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  16. A. Polikarov (1968). Zum kausalitatsproblem Von. In Raymond Klibansky (ed.), Contemporary Philosophy. Firenze, la Nuova Italia. 2--298.
    No categories
    Translate to English
    |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation