About this topic
Summary Unity of science is, most basically, the idea that all fields of science are in some way united.  The most well-known thesis of the unity of science is that all fields of science will ultimately be reduced to fundamental physics, thereby demonstrating the basis for all scientific laws in the universal laws of physics.  This extreme form of reductionism was prominent in philosophy of science in the mid-twentieth century.  In response, a number of philosophers have since advocated for the disunity of science.  Very different views of the unity of science have also been put forward; these focus instead on the sciences' shared methods, shared language, or shared aims.  A notable example is the Vienna Circle's programmatic unity of science movement.  
Key works A classic formulation of reductive unity of science is Oppenheim & Putnam 1958Fodor 1974 formulates an influential alternative view of the disunity of science based on multiple realization.  Disunity of science is also advocated by Dupré 1993Rosenberg 1994, and Cartwright 2012. Alternative formulations of unity of science include Darden & Maull 1977 and Grantham 2004.  See Morris 1966 and Symons et al 2011 on the logical empiricists', and especially Otto Neurath's, unity of science movement.  
Introductions See Cat 2013 for an overview of the history of the unity of science issue and an overview of the variety of unities that have been posited.  
Related categories

185 found
Order:
1 — 50 / 185
  1. Nietzsche's Will to Power as a Doctrine of the Unity of Science.R. Lanier Anderson - 2005 - Angelaki 10 (1):77 – 93.
    (2005). Nietzsche's will to Power as a Doctrine of the Unity of Science. Angelaki: Vol. 10, continental philosophy and the sciences the german traditionissue editor: damian veal, pp. 77-93.
  2. Nietzsche's Will to Power as a Doctrine of the Unity of Science.R. Lanier Anderson - 1994 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 25 (5):729-750.
  3. Unity Without Myths.Daniel Andler - 2011 - In John Symons, Juan Manuel Torres & Olga Plomb (eds.), New approaches to the Unity of Science, vol. 1: Otto Neurath and the Unity of Science. Springer.
    We seem to suffer from a case of cognitive dissonance. On the one hand, we seem to have almost unanimously rejected as hopeless or incoherent the aim of a unified science. On the other, we passionately debate about the prospects of research programs which, if successful, would considerably enhance the prospects of unification: from particle physics to cognitive neuroscience, from evolutionary theory to logical modeling or dynamic systems, a common motivation seems to be the quest for unity1. The purpose of (...)
  4. Federalism in Science — Complementarity Vs Perspectivism: Reply to Harré.Daniel Andler - 2006 - Synthese 151 (3):519 - 522.
  5. The Unity of Scientific Inquiry and Categorial Theory in Artistotle.Jp Anton - 1990 - Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science 121:29-43.
  6. Book Reviews : Culture and Cultural Entities: Toward a New Unity of Science . By Joseph Margolis. Synthese Library, Vol. 170. Dordrecht/Boston/Lancaster: D. Reidel Publishing Co., 1984. Pp. 170. $34.95. [REVIEW]J. E. Bachrach - 1987 - Philosophy of the Social Sciences 17 (4):586-591.
  7. New Theories of Everything: The Quest for Ultimate Explanation.John D. Barrow - 2007 - Oxford University Press.
    Will we ever discover a single scientific theory that explains everything that has ever happened and everything that will happen - a key that unlocks the ...
  8. Newman on the Problem of the Partiality and Unity of the Sciences.Michael Baur - 2003 - Proceedings of the American Catholic Philosophical Association 77:111-127.
    This paper focuses on Newman’s approach to what we might call “the problem of the partiality and unity of the sciences.” The problem can be expressedin the form of a question: “If all human knowing is finite and partial, then on what grounds can one know of the unity and wholeness of all the sciences?” Newman’s solution to the problem is openly theistic, since it appeals to one’s knowledge of God. For Newman, even if I exclusively pursue my own partial (...)
  9. Reduction, Integration, and the Unity of Science: Natural, Behavioral, and Social Sciences and the Humanities.William P. Bechtel & Andrew Hamilton - 2007 - In T. Kuipers (ed.), Philosophy of Science: Focal Issues (Volume 1 of the Handbook of the Philosophy of Science). Elsevier.
    1. A Historical Look at Unity 2. Field Guide to Modern Concepts of Reduction and Unity 3. Kitcher's Revisionist Account of Unification 4. Critics of Unity 5. Integration Instead of Unity 6. Reduction via Mechanisms 7. Case Studies in Reduction and Unification across the Disciplines.
  10. Paradigm of Unity as a Prospect for Research and Treatment in Psychology.Adam Biela - 2014 - Journal for Perspectives of Economic Political and Social Integration 19 (1-2):207-227.
    The purpose of this paper is to show the methodological power and potentiality of the concept paradigm of unity introduced originally in the ceremony on the occasion of honoring Chiara Lubich with the doctor honoris causa title by the Catholic University of Lublin in 1996. Originally this conception was used to suggest the societal activity of Chiara Lubich in building, via the Focolari movement, psychosocial infrastructures for unity in various social domains,, in public media, in ecumenism and inter-religious contacts This (...)
  11. "Unity of Science," by Robert L. Causey.Richard J. Blackwell - 1978 - Modern Schoolman 55 (4):419-420.
  12. Metaphysics, Mind, and the Unity of Science.David Boersema - 2004 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 27 (5):627-628.
    Ross & Spurrett's (R&S's) rebuttal of recent reductionistic work in the philosophy of mind relies on claims about the unity of science and explanation. I call those claims into question.
  13. Individualism and the Unity of Science, Harold Kincaid. Rowman & Littlefield, 1997, VII + 165 Pages. [REVIEW]Michael Bradie - 2000 - Economics and Philosophy 16 (1):147-174.
  14. Three Views Concerning the Unity of Science.Larry Briskman - 1987 - In Gerard Radnitzky (ed.), Centripetal Forces in the Sciences. Paragon House Publishers. pp. 1--105.
  15. The Methodological Unity of Science.Mario Augusto Bunge (ed.) - 1973 - Boston: Reidel.
    ... presented as "the'tirst ph'uosopher who attempte'd to be both exact and in tune with the science of his day. Certain rules of philosophical method are ...
  16. Science in Two Minds: Reflections on the Missional Disunity Within Contemporary Medicine.P. C. Burcham - 2014 - Christian Bioethics 20 (3):359-375.
  17. Conceptual Change, Cross-Theoretical Explanation, and the Unity of Science.Richard M. Burian - 1975 - Synthese 32 (1-2):1 - 28.
  18. An Educational Application of Resources of the Unity of Science Movement.Lee Byrne - 1940 - Philosophy of Science 7 (2):241-262.
  19. La Problématique Philosophique de l'Unité de la Science. [REVIEW]D. C. - 1965 - Review of Metaphysics 18 (3):592-592.
  20. Organizing Committee of the International Congresses for the Unity of Science.R. Carnap, P. Frank, J. Jorgensen, C. W. Morris, O. Neurath, H. Reichenbach, L. Rougier & L. S. Stebbing - 1938 - Journal of Unified Science (Erkenntnis) 7:421.
  21. The Unity of Science.Rudolf Carnap - 2012 - Routledge.
    As a leading member of the Vienna Circle, Rudolph Carnap's aim was to bring about a "unified science" by applying a method of logical analysis to the empirical data of all the sciences. This work, first published in English in 1934, endeavors to work out a way in which the observation statements required for verification are not private to the observer. The work shows the strong influence of Wittgenstein, Russell, and Frege.
  22. The Unity of Science.Rudolf Carnap - 2011 - Routledge.
    As a leading member of the Vienna Circle, Rudolph Carnap's aim was to bring about a "unified science" by applying a method of logical analysis to the empirical data of all the sciences. This work, first published in English in 1934, endeavors to work out a way in which the observation statements required for verification are not private to the observer. The work shows the strong influence of Wittgenstein, Russell, and Frege.
  23. The Unity of Science.Rudolf Carnap - 1934 - London: K. Paul, Trench, Trubner & Co..
    As a leading member of the Vienna Circle, Rudolph Carnap's aim was to bring about a "unified science" by applying a method of logical analysis to the empirical data of all the sciences. This work, first published in English in 1934, endeavors to work out a way in which the observation statements required for verification are not private to the observer. The work shows the strong influence of Wittgenstein, Russell, and Frege.
  24. On the Disunity of Science or Why Psychology is Not a Branch of Physics.Martin Carrier - unknown
  25. The Unity of Science.Martin Carrier - 1990 - International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 4 (1):17-31.
    Abstract The paper addresses the question of how the unity of science can adequately be characterized. A mere classification of scientific fields and disciplines does not express the unity of science unless it is supplemented with a perspective that establishes a systematic coherence among the different branches of science. Four ideas of this kind are discussed. Namely, the unity of scientific language, of scientific laws, of scientific method and of science as a practical?operational enterprise. Whereas reference to the unity of (...)
  26. Unity and Disunity of Science.Jodi Cat - 2006 - In J. Pfeifer & Sahotra Sarkar (eds.), The Philosophy of Science: An Encyclopedia. Psychology Press. pp. 2--842.
  27. The Unity of Science.Jordi Cat - 2013 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
  28. Scientific Unity.Jordi Cat - 2007 - In Thaddeus Metz (ed.), Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
  29. Unity of Science.Robert L. Causey - 1977 - Philosophical Review 90 (1):150-153.
  30. Book Review:The Disunity of Science: Boundaries Contexts, and Power Peter Galison, David J. Stump. [REVIEW]Steve Clarke - 1999 - Philosophy of Science 66 (3):506-.
  31. Problems of Modern Science.Le Systeme des Sciences: Le Vrai, L'Intelligible, Et le Reel.The Unity of Science.Wm Forbes Cooley, Arthur Dendy, Edmond Goblot & Johan Hjort - 1923 - Journal of Philosophy 20 (22):603.
  32. Beyond Reduction: Mechanisms, Multifield Integration and the Unity of Neuroscience.Carl F. Craver - 2005 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C 36 (2):373-395.
    Philosophers of neuroscience have traditionally described interfield integration using reduction models. Such models describe formal inferential relations between theories at different levels. I argue against reduction and for a mechanistic model of interfield integration. According to the mechanistic model, different fields integrate their research by adding constraints on a multilevel description of a mechanism. Mechanistic integration may occur at a given level or in the effort to build a theory that oscillates among several levels. I develop this alternative model using (...)
  33. The Unity of Science: Carnap, Neurath, and Beyond.Richard Creath - 1996 - In Peter Galison & David J. Stump (eds.), The Disunity of Science: Boundaries, Contexts, and Power. Stanford University Press. pp. 158--169.
  34. A Discussion About the Unity of Science: Neurath and the Utopia of Unified Science.Ivan Ferreira da Cunha - 2015 - Scientiae Studia 13 (1):97-122.
    Neste artigo apresentamos as propostas de Otto Neurath para o problema da unidade da ciência. Conhecido integrante do Círculo de Viena, Neurath defende que a ciência deve ser unificada por meio da chamada concepção de mundo científica, uma orientação ou atitude em relação ao mundo e aos problemas que é característica da ciência. Neste artigo apresentamos o caráter social dos projetos de Neurath, como o da Enciclopédia Internacional da Ciência Unificada. Contrastamos a proposta de Neurath com a crítica pós-modernista da (...)
  35. Unity of Knowledge: The Convergence of Natural and Human Science.Antonio R. Damasio (ed.) - 2001 - New York Academy of Sciences.
  36. Interfield Theories.Lindley Darden & Nancy Maull - 1977 - Philosophy of Science 44 (1):43-64.
    This paper analyzes the generation and function of hitherto ignored or misrepresented interfield theories , theories which bridge two fields of science. Interfield theories are likely to be generated when two fields share an interest in explaining different aspects of the same phenomenon and when background knowledge already exists relating the two fields. The interfield theory functions to provide a solution to a characteristic type of theoretical problem: how are the relations between fields to be explained? In solving this problem (...)
  37. Explanatory Disunities and the Unity of Science.David Davies - 1996 - International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 10 (1):5 – 21.
    Abstract According to John Dupré, the metaphysics underpinning modern science posits a deterministic, fully law?governed and potentially fully intelligible structure that pervades the entire universe. To reject such a metaphysical framework for science is to subscribe to ?the disorder of things?, and the latter, according to Dupré, entails the impossibility of a unified science. Dupré's argument rests crucially upon purported disunities evident in the explanatory practices of science. I critically examine the implied project of drawing metaphysical conclusions from epistemological premisses (...)
  38. Foundations of the Unity of Science. II 8: The Development of Rationalism and Empiricism.George de Santillana & Edgar Zilsel - 1943 - Philosophical Review 52 (1):87-87.
  39. The Unity of Scientific Policy ДВАЖЦЫ ДВА = Two Times Two = = 2×2.Stevan Dedijer & Guy Hunter - 1964 - Minerva 3 (1):126-130.
  40. Foundations of the Unity of Science. Vol. II, No. 4: Theory of Valuation.John Dewey - 1941 - Philosophical Review 50 (4):443-446.
  41. Science Without Unity.Rickard Donovan - 1990 - International Philosophical Quarterly 30 (1):122-125.
  42. John Dupré, The Disorder of Things. [REVIEW]Phil Dowe - 1994 - Philosophy in Review 14:387-389.
  43. Against Scientific Imperialism.J. Dupre - 1994 - PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1994:374 - 381.
    Most discussion of the unity of science has concerned what might be called vertical relations between theories: the reducibility of biology to chemistry, or chemistry to physics, and so on. In this paper I shall be concerned rather with horizontal relations, that is to say, with theories of different kinds that deal with objects at the same structural level. Whereas the former, vertical, conception of unity through reduction has come under a good deal of criticism recently (see, e.g., Dupré 1993), (...)
  44. The Disunity of Science.John Dupré - 1983 - Mind 92 (367):321-346.
  45. Unity of Science.M. M. E. - 1978 - Review of Metaphysics 31 (4):666-667.
  46. International Encyclopedia of Unified Science, Volumes I and II: Foundations of the Unity of Science. [REVIEW]N. E. - 1938 - Journal of Philosophy 35 (25):689-693.
  47. Biology and the Unity of Science.Claus Emmeche - 2001 - SATS: Northern European Journal of Philosophy 2 (1):153-162.
  48. Unity of Science and Pluralism: Cognitive Neurosciences of Racial Prejudice as a Case Study.Luc Faucher - 2012 - In Torres Juan, Pombo Olga, Symons John & Rahman Shahid (eds.), Special Sciences and the Unity of Science. Springer. pp. 177--204.
  49. Does the Unity of Science Have a Future?Jan Faye - 2014 - Vienna Circle Institute Yearbook 17:263-275.
    The program of logical positivism gave inspiration to the unity of science movement. The movement carried the belief that all sciences, including the social sciences and the humanities, ought to share some common language if these disciplines were to be considered genuine sciences.
  50. Rethinking Science a Philosophical Introduction to the Unity of Science.Jan Faye - 2002
1 — 50 / 185