Skip to main content
Log in

Is there any theoretical justification for a nonstatement view of theories?

  • Published:
Synthese Aims and scope Submit manuscript

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.

Bibliography

  • Adams, E. W., ‘The Foundations of Rigid Body Mechanics’, in L. Henkin, P. Suppes and A. Tarski, (eds),The Axiomatic Method, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1959.

    Google Scholar 

  • Balzer, W., ‘On the status of Arithmetic’,Erkenntnis 14 (1979), 57–89.

    Google Scholar 

  • Balzer, W., ‘Incommensurability and Reduction’, in I. Niiniluoto and R. Tuomela, (eds),The Logic and Epistemology of Scientific Change (Acta Philosophica Fennica30) North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1979.

    Google Scholar 

  • Balzer, W. and Sneed J. D. ‘Generalized Net Structures of Empirical Theories, I,Studia Logica 36 (1977), 195–211.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carnap, R., ‘A Basic System of Inductive Logic, Part I’, in R. Carnap and R. C. Jeffrey, (eds),Studies in Inductive Logic and Probability, Vol. I, University of California Press, Berkeley, 1971.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carnap, R., ‘Observation Language and Theoretical Language’, In J. Hintikka, (ed),Rudolf Carnap: Logical Empiricist, Reidel, Dordrecht, 1975.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feferman, S., ‘Two Notes on Abstract Model Theory’, I,Fund. Math. 82, (1974), 153–165.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feyerabend, P. K., ‘Changing Patterns of Reconstruction’,Brit. J. Phil. Sci. 28 (1977), 351–369.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giedymin, J., ‘Logical Comparability and Conceptual Disparity Between Newtonian and Relativisitic Mechanics’,Brit. J. Phil. Sci. 24 (1973), 270–276.

    Google Scholar 

  • Giedymin, J. (ed), Kazimierz Ajdukiewicz:The Scientific World-Perspective and Other Essays, 1931–1963, Reidel, Dordrecht, 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hilpinen, R., ‘Approximate Truth' and Truthlikeness’, in M. Przełęcki, K. Szaniawski and R. Wójcicki, (eds),Formal Methods in the Methodology of Empirical Sciences, Ossolineum, Wroclaw and Reidel, Dordrecht, 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  • McKinsey, J. C. C., Sugar, A.C. and Suppes, P., ‘Axiomatic Foundations of Classical Particle Mechanics’,J. Rational Mechanics and Analysis 2, (1953), 253–272.

    Google Scholar 

  • Montague, R., ‘Deterministic Theories’, in R. Thomason, (ed),Formal Philosophy. Selected Papers of Richard Montague, New Haven, London, 1974.

    Google Scholar 

  • Niiniluoto, I., ‘Truthlikeness in First-Order Languages’, in J. Hintikka, I. Niiniluoto and E. Saarinen, (eds),Essays on Mathematical and Philosophical Logic, Reidel, Dordrecht, 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  • Niiniluoto, I., ‘The Growth of Theories: Comments on the Structuralist Approach’, inProceedings of the Second International Congress for History and Philosophy of Science, Pisa, 1978, Reidel, Dordrecht, 1980.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearce, D. A.,Translation, Reduction and Equivalence: Some Topics in Intertheory Relations, Doctoral Dissertation, University of Sussex, 1979.

  • Pearce, D. A. ‘A Mathematical Characterization of Interpretation, Reduction and Definitional Equivalence’ (submitted toStudia Logica, 1980a).

  • Pearce, D. A., ‘Some Relations between Empirical Systems’, forthcoming, 1980b.

  • Pearce, D. A., ‘Logical Properties of the Structuralist Concept of Reduction’, (submitted toErkenntnis, 1980c).

  • Przełęcki, M.,The Logic of Empirical Theories, Routledge and Kegan Paul, London, 1969.

    Google Scholar 

  • Przełęcki, M., ‘A Set Theoretic versus a Model Theoretic Approach to the Logical Structure of Physical Theories’,Studia Logica 33 (1974), 91–105.

    Google Scholar 

  • Przełęcki, M., ‘Commensurable Referents of Incommensurable Terms’, in I. Niiniluoto and R. Tuomela, (eds),op. cit.

  • Przełęcki, M. and Wójcicki, R., ‘The Problem of Analyticity’,Synthese 19 (1969), 374–399.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rantala, V., ‘Definability Problems in the Methodology of Science’, in M. Prezełęcki, K. Szaniawski and R. Wójcicki, (eds), op. cit. (1976).

    Google Scholar 

  • Rantala, V.,Aspects of Definability, (Acta Philosophica Fennica29), North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1977.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rantala, V., ‘The Old and The New Logic of Metascience’,Synthese 39 (1978), 233–247.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rantala, V., ‘On the Logical Basis of the Structuralist Philosophy of Science’,Erkenntnis 20 (1980).

  • Sneed, J. D.,The Logical Structure of Mathematical Physics, Reidel, Dordrecht, 1971. (2nd. ed. 1979).

    Google Scholar 

  • Stegmüller, W., ‘Structures and Dynamics of Theories: Some Reflections on J. D. Sneed and T. S. Kuhn’,Erkenntnis 9 (1975), 75–100.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stegmüller, W.,The Structure and Dynamics of Theories, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stegmüller, W., A Combined Approach to the Dynamics of Theories,Theory and Decision 9 (1978), 39–75, (1978a).

    Google Scholar 

  • Stegmüller, W., ‘Logical Understanding and the Dynamics of The Theories’, in W. Stegmüller,Collected Papers, Reidel, Dordrecht, 1978, (1978b).

    Google Scholar 

  • Stegmüller, W.,The Structuralist View of Theories, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1979.

    Google Scholar 

  • Suppes, P.,Introduction to Logic, Van Nostrand, Princeton, 1957.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tuomela, R.,Theoretical Concepts, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1973.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tuomela, R., ‘On the Structuralist Approach to the Dynamics of Theories’,Synthese 39 (1978), 211–231.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, P. M., ‘On the Conservative Extensions of Semantical Systems’,Synthese 25, (1972), 398–416.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, P. M., ‘On the Logical Relations between Expressions of Different Theories’,Brit. J. Phil. Sci. 24, (1973).

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

I am indebted to Adam Daum, Jerzy Giedymin, Ilkka Niiniluoto, Veikko Rantala and Raimo Tuomela, who kindly read and commented on an earlier version of this paper. I should also like to express my thanks to Prof. Ingmar Pörn for inviting me to discuss a part of this work in the Philosophy Seminar at the University of Helsinki, and to the editor ofSynthese for encouraging its publication.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Pearce, D. Is there any theoretical justification for a nonstatement view of theories?. Synthese 46, 1–39 (1981). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01064465

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01064465

Keywords

Navigation