84 found
Order:
Disambiguations:
Thomas Nickles [87]Thomas Jacob Nickles [1]
See also:
Profile: Thomas Nickles (University of Nevada, Reno)
  1.  46
    Emiliano Ippoliti, Thomas Nickles & Fabio Sterpetti (2016). Modeling and Inferring in Science. In Emiliano Ippoliti, Fabio Sterpetti & Thomas Nickles (eds.), Models and Inferences in Science. Springer 1-9.
    Science continually contributes new models and rethinks old ones. The way inferences are made is constantly being re-evaluated. The practice and achievements of science are both shaped by this process, so it is important to understand how models and inferences are made. But, despite the relevance of models and inference in scientific practice, these concepts still remain contro-versial in many respects. The attempt to understand the ways models and infer-ences are made basically opens two roads. The first one is to (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  2. Thomas Nickles (1973). Two Concepts of Intertheoretic Reduction. Journal of Philosophy 70 (April):181-201.
  3.  23
    Thomas Nickles (ed.) (2003). Thomas Kuhn. Cambridge University Press.
    Contemporary Philosophy in Focus offers a series of introductory volumes to many of the dominant philosophical thinkers of the current age. Thomas Kuhn (1922-1996), the author of The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, is probably the best-known and most influential historian and philosopher of science of the last 25 years, and has become something of a cultural icon. His concepts of paradigm, paradigm change and incommensurability have changed the way we think about science. This volume offers an introduction to Kuhn's life (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   9 citations  
  4.  47
    Thomas Nickles (1981). What is a Problem That We May Solve It? Synthese 47 (1):85 - 118.
    No categories
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   24 citations  
  5.  9
    Thomas Nickles (2006). Heuristic Appraisal: Context of Discovery or Justification? In Jutta Schickore & Friedrich Steinle (eds.), Revisiting Discovery and Justification. Springer 159--182.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  6. Thomas Nickles (1987). Lakatosian Heuristics and Epistemic Support. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 38 (2):181-205.
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  7.  26
    Thomas Nickles (1985). Beyond Divorce: Current Status of the Discovery Debate. Philosophy of Science 52 (2):177-206.
    Does the viability of the discovery program depend on showing either (1) that methods of generating new problem solutions, per se, have special probative weight (the per se thesis); or, (2) that the original conception of an idea is logically continuous with its justification (anti-divorce thesis)? Many writers have identified these as the key issues of the discovery debate. McLaughlin, Pera, and others recently have defended the discovery program by attacking the divorce thesis, while Laudan has attacked the discovery program (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   12 citations  
  8.  91
    Thomas Nickles, Scientific Revolutions. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
    Translate
      Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  9.  20
    Thomas Nickles (1990). Discovery Logics. Philosophica 45 (1):7-32.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   6 citations  
  10.  39
    Thomas Nickles (2009). Life at the Frontier: The Relevance of Heuristic Appraisal to Policy. [REVIEW] Axiomathes 19 (4):441-464.
    Economic competitive advantage depends on innovation, which in turn requires pushing back the frontiers of various kinds of knowledge. Although understanding how knowledge grows ought to be a central topic of epistemology, epistemologists and philosophers of science have given it insufficient attention, even deliberately shunning the topic. Traditional confirmation theory and general epistemology offer little help at the frontier, because they are mostly retrospective rather than prospective. Nor have philosophers been highly visible in the science and technology policy realm, despite (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  11.  8
    Thomas Nickles (1997). A Multi-Pass Conception of Scientific Inquiry. Danish Yearbook of Philosophy 32:11-44.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   6 citations  
  12. Thomas Nickles (1982). Scientific Discovery, Logic and Rationality. Mind 91 (363):468-470.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   12 citations  
  13.  26
    Thomas Nickles (1986). Remarks on the Use of History as Evidence. Synthese 69 (2):253 - 266.
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   7 citations  
  14.  6
    Thomas Nickles (2012). 6 Some Puzzles About Kuhn's Exemplars. In Vasō Kintē & Theodore Arabatzis (eds.), Kuhn's the Structure of Scientific Revolutions Revisited. Routledge 112.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  15.  26
    Thomas Nickles (1996). Deflationary Methodology and Rationality of Science. Philosophica 58.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  16. Thomas Nickles (1980). Scientific Discovery Case Studies.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   5 citations  
  17.  53
    Joke Meheus & Thomas Nickles (1999). The Methodological Study of Creativity and Discovery -- Some Background. Foundations of Science 4 (3):231-235.
  18.  16
    Thomas Nickles (1996). Methods of Discovery. Biology and Philosophy 12 (1):127-140.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  19.  40
    Thomas Nickles (1989). Heuristic Appraisal: A Proposal. Social Epistemology 3 (3):175 – 188.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  20.  33
    Thomas Nickles (1978). Scientific Problems and Constraints. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1978:134 - 148.
    In this paper the relation between scientific problems and the constraints on their solutions is explored. First the historical constraints on the solution to the blackbody radiation problem are set out. The blackbody history is used as a guide in sketching a working taxonomy of constraints, which distinguishes various kinds of reductive and nonreductive constraints. Finally, this discussion is related to some work in erotetic logic. The hypothesis that scientific problems can be identified with structured sets of constraints is interesting; (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  21.  51
    Thomas Nickles (2005). Problem Reduction: Some Thoughts. Poznan Studies in the Philosophy of the Sciences and the Humanities 84 (1):107-133.
    Reduction was once a central topic in philosophy of science. I claim that it remains important, especially when applied to problems and problem-solutions rather than only to large theory-complexes. Without attempting a comprehensive classification, I discuss various kinds of problem reductions and similar relations, illustrating them, inter alia, in terms of the blackbody problem and early quantization problems. Kuhn's early work is suggestive here both for structuralist theory of science and for the line I prefer to take. My central claims (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  22.  12
    Thomas Nickles (1988). Questioning and Problems in Philosophy of Science: Problem-Solving Versus Directly Truth-Seeking Epistemologies. In Michel Meyer (ed.), Questions and Questioning. W. De Gruyter 43--67.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  23.  13
    Thomas Nickles (2013). The Problem of Demarcation History and Future. In Massimo Pigliucci & Maarten Boudry (eds.), Philosophy of Pseudoscience: Reconsidering the Demarcation Problem. University of Chicago Press 101.
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  24. Thomas Nickles (2006). Problem of Demarcation. In J. Pfeifer & Sahotra Sarkar (eds.), The Philosophy of Science: An Encyclopedia. Psychology Press 1--188.
  25.  38
    Thomas Nickles (2004). Review: Selectivity and Discord: Two Problems of Experiment. [REVIEW] Mind 113 (450):344-347.
    No categories
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  26.  37
    Thomas Nickles (2000). Kuhnian Puzzle Solving and Schema Theory. Philosophy of Science 67 (3):255.
    Looking at Thomas Kuhn's work from a cognitive science perspective helps to articulate and to legitimize, to some degree, his rejection of traditional views of concepts, categorization, theory structure, and rule-based problem solving. Whereas my colleagues focus on the later Kuhn of the MIT years, I study the early Kuhn as an anticipation of case-based reasoning and schema theory. These recent developments in cognitive psychology and artificial intelligence may point toward a more computational version of Kuhn's ideas, but they also (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  27.  15
    Thomas Nickles (2014). Kuhn's Philosophical Conception of Science as Evolutionary, Social, and Epistemological. Metascience 23 (1):37-42.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  28.  7
    Thomas Nickles (1984). Positive Science and Discoverability. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1984:13 - 27.
    Although seriously defective, 17th-century ideas about discovery, justification, and positive science are not as hopeless, useless, and out of date as many philosophers assume. They appear to underlie modern scientific practice. The generationist view of justification interestingly links justification with discovery issues while employing a concept of empirical support quite foreign to the modern, consequentialist concept, which identifies empirical evidence with favorable test results (predictive/explanatory success). In the generationist sense, justification amounts to potential discovery or "discoverability". A partial defense of (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  29.  13
    Thomas Nickles (1988). Truth or Consequences? Generative Versus Consequential Justification in Science. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1988:393 - 405.
    Pure consequentialists hold that all theoretical justification derives from testing the consequences of hypotheses, while generativists maintain that reasoning (some feature of) the hypothesis from we already know is an important form of justification. The strongest form of justification (they claim) is an idealized discovery argument. In the guise of H-D methodology, consequentialism is widely supposed to have defeated generativism during the 19th century. I argue that novel prediction fails to overcome the logical weakness of consequentialism or to render generative (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  30. Thomas Nickles (1987). From Natural Philosophy to Metaphilosophy of Science. In P. Achinstein & R. Kagon (eds.), Kelvin's Baltimore Lectures and Modern Theoretical Physics. MIT Press 507--541.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  31.  29
    Thomas Nickles (1973). Explanation and Description-Relativity. Philosophy of Science 40 (3):408-414.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  32.  31
    Thomas Nickles (1977). Davidson on Explanation. Philosophical Studies 31 (February):141-145.
    Davidson's defective defense of the consistency of (1) the causal interaction of mental and physical events, (2) the backing law thesis on causation, (3) the impossibility of lawfully explaining mental events is repaired by closer attention to the description-Relativity of explanation. Davidson wrongly allows that particular mental events are explainable when particular identities to physical events are known. The author argues that such identities are powerless to affect what features a given law can explain. Thus a great intelligence knowing all (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  33. Thomas Nickles (1989). Integrating the Science Studies Disciplines. In Steve Fuller (ed.), The Cognitive Turn: Sociological and Psychological Perspectives on Science. Kluwer Academic Publishers
    No categories
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  34.  12
    Thomas Nickles (1980). Scientific Problems: Three Empiricist Models. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1980:3 - 19.
    One component of a viable account of scientific inquiry is a defensible conception of scientific problems. This paper specifies some logical and conceptual requirements that an acceptable account of scientific problems must meet as well as indicating some features that a study of scientific inquiry indicates scientific problems have. On the basis of these requirements and features, three standard empiricist models of problems are examined and found wanting. Finally a constraint inclusion-model of scientific problems is proposed.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  35. Thomas Nickles (2002). The Discovery-Justification (DJ) Distinction and Professional Philosophy of Science: Comments on the First Day's Five Papers. In Schickore J. & Steinle F. (eds.), Revisiting Discovery and Justification. Max-Planck-Institut 67--78.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  36.  10
    Colin Howson & Thomas Nickles (1979). Review. [REVIEW] Erkenntnis 14 (1):87-102.
    No categories
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  37.  19
    Thomas Nickles (1971). Covering Law Explanation. Philosophy of Science 38 (4):542-561.
    A serious problem for covering law explanation is raised and its consequences for the Hempelian theory of explanation are discussed. The problem concerns an intensional feature of explanations, involving the manner in which theoretical law statements are related to the events explained. The basic problem arises because explanations are not of events but of events under descriptions; moreover, in a sense, our linguistic descriptions outrun laws. One form of the problem, termed the problem of weak intensionality, is apparently solved by (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  38.  14
    Thomas Nickles (1982). Book Review:Science and Hypothesis Larry Laudan. [REVIEW] Philosophy of Science 49 (4):653-.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  39.  7
    Thomas Nickles (1977). On the Independence of Singular Causal Explanation in Social Science: Archaeology. Philosophy of the Social Sciences 7 (2):163-187.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  40.  14
    Thomas Nickles (2003). Thomas Kuhn's Legacy: Some Remarks. Social Epistemology 17 (2-3):253-258.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  41.  2
    Thomas Nickles (2011). Karl Popper's Philosophy of Science: Rationality Without FoundationsThomas Kuhn's “Linguistic Turn” and the Legacy of Logical Empiricism: Incommensurability, Rationality, and the Search for Truth. [REVIEW] Isis: A Journal of the History of Science 102:205-207.
    Karl Popper's Philosophy of Science: Rationality without FoundationsThomas Kuhn's “Linguistic Turn” and the Legacy of Logical Empiricism: Incommensurability, Rationality, and the Search for Truth by Stefano Gattei; Stefano Gattei.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  42.  2
    Thomas Nickles (1990). Social Epistemology by Steve Fuller. [REVIEW] Isis: A Journal of the History of Science 81:806-808.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  43.  11
    Thomas Nickles (1981). Book Review:Theory and Meaning David Papineau. [REVIEW] Philosophy of Science 48 (3):500-.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  44. Thomas Nickles (1984). Justification as Discoverability II. Philosophia Naturalis 21 (2/4):563-576.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  45.  8
    Thomas Nickles (1974). Theory Generalization, Problem Reduction and the Unity of Science. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1974:33 - 75.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  46. Thomas Nickles (1979). Finocchiaro, Maurice A., "History of Science as Explanation". [REVIEW] Erkenntnis 14:93.
    No categories
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  47.  8
    Thomas Nickles (2004). Review of Gary L. Hardcastle (Ed.), Alan W. Richardson (Ed.), Logical Empiricism in North America: Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, XVIII. [REVIEW] Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews 2004 (7).
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  48.  2
    Thomas Nickles (2002). Scientific Laws, Principles, and Theories: A Reference Guide. [REVIEW] Isis: A Journal of the History of Science 93:172-173.
    This book is intended as a reference source of “universal scientific laws, physical principles, viable theories, and testable hypotheses” from ancient times to the present. Robert Krebs states that he includes only the physical and biological sciences, including geology, but in fact there are also several mathematical and logical entries ranging from the Greeks to Gödel. The book contains over four hundred entries, in alphabetical order, averaging less than a page each, plus a glossary of nearly four hundred technical terms. (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  49.  6
    Thomas Nickles (1985). Book Review:Reason and the Search for Knowledge Dudley Shapere. [REVIEW] Philosophy of Science 52 (2):310-.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  50.  7
    Joke Meheus & Thomas Nickles (1999). Introductory Note. Foundations of Science 4 (4):373-374.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
1 — 50 / 84