Skip to main content
Log in

A functional analysis of scientific theories

  • Diskussion
  • Published:
Zeitschrift für allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

Scientific theories are analyzed in terms of the role that they play in science rather than in terms of their logical structure. It is maintained that theories: (1) provide descriptions of the fundamental features of their domains; (2) on the basis of 1, explain non-fundamental features of their domains; (3) provide a guide for further research in their domains. Any set of propositions that carries out these functions with respect to some domain counts as a theory. This view of theories is developed and defended, and provides the basis for reconsidering a number of issues in the philisophy of science. It is argued that theories need not be unrestrictedly universal with respect to space and time; that the distinction between observable and theoretical entities fails because observables do function as theoretical entities in scientific theories, that there is no genuine philosophical problem of reduction; that the notion of „levels“ can be replaced by the notion of „domains”; and that theories are the basic unit of scientific knowledge.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Anderson, C. “The Apparent Existence of Easily Deflectable Positives.”Science 76, 1932, pp. 238–239.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Anderson, C. “Positive Electron.”Physical Review 43, 1933, pp. 491–494.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bacon, F.The New Organon, ed. F. Anderson. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill Company, 1960.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Bohr, N. “Conservation Laws in Quantum Theory.”Nature 138, 1936, pp. 25–26.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Bohr, N., Kramers, H., and Slater, J. “The Quantum Theory of Radiation.”Sources of Quantum Mechanics, ed. B. van der Waerden. New York: Dover Books, 1967, pp. 159–176.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Brown, H. “Problems Changes in Science and Philosophy.”Metaphilosophy 6, 1975, pp. 177–192.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Brown, H.Perception, Theory and Commitment: The New Philosophy of Science. Chicago: Precedent Publishing, 1977.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Dirac, P. “Does Conservation of Energy Hold in Atomic Processes?”Nature 137, 1936, p. 298.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Einstein, A. “On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies.”The Principle of Relativity, trans. W. Perett and G. Jeffery. New York: Dover Books.

  10. Einstein, A.Out of My Later Years. Secaucus: Citadel Press, 1956.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Gamow, G.Thirthy Years That Shook Physics. Garden City: Doubleday & Company, 1966.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Graves, J.The Conceptual Foundations of Contemporary Relativity Theory. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1971.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Grosser, M.The Discovery of Neptune. Cambridge. Harvard University Press, 1962.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Hanson, N.Perception and Discovery, ed. W. Humphreys. San Francisco: Freeman, Cooper & Company, 1969.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Hanson, N.The Concept of the Position. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1963.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Hebb, D.Organization of Behavior. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1949.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Hebb, D.A Textbook of Psychology. Philadelphia: W. B. Saunders & Company, 1958.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Hempel, C. “The Theoretician's Dilemma.”Aspects of Scientific Explanation. New York: The Free Press, 1965, pp. 173–226.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Hoyle, F.Galaxies, Nuclei, and Quasars. New York: Harper & Row, 1965.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Jacobsen, J. “Correlation Between Scattering and Recoil in the Compton Effect.”Nature 138, 1936, p. 25.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Kuhn, T.The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, 2nd edition. Chicago: University of Chigago Press, 1970.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Lakatos, I. “Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes.”Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge, ed. I. Lakatos and A. Musgrave. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1970.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Maxwell, G. “The Ontological Status of Theoretical Entities.”Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science III, ed. H. Feigl and G. Maxwell. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1962, pp. 3–27.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Nagel, E.The Structure of Science. New York: Harcourt, Brace & World, 1961.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Nickles, T. “Heuristics and Justification in Scientific Research: Comments on Shapere.”The Structure of Scientific Theories, ed. F. Suppe. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1974.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Popper, K. Conjectures and Refutations. New York: Harper & Row, 1963.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Shapere, D. “Scientific Theories and The Domains.”The Structure of Scientific Theoriés, ed. F. Suppe. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1974.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Wu, C. and Moszkowski, S.Beta Decay. New York: Interscience Publishers, 1966.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Brown, H.I. A functional analysis of scientific theories. Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 10, 119–140 (1979). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01809031

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01809031

Keywords

Navigation