Abstract
The fifteen selections in this volume are collected around the thesis that many of the foundations and tenets of empiricism are mistaken and must be either rejected outright or radically revised. To introduce these essays, Morick briefly traces the development of modern empiricism from what he considers its source in Hume’s theory of knowledge through the phenomenalist stage to the present conception of empiricism, one of whose basic principles continues to be the fundamental role of observation in the acquisition of knowledge: perception provides the foundation of empirical knowledge. It is particularly this "foundation picture" which has been denounced by many contemporary critics of empiricism as both oversimplified and misleading. The critics, including those in philosophy of language, philosophy of science, and scientists themselves, have proposed three related objections to this notion. The first is that rather than drawing a sharp distinction between observation claims and theoretical claims, observation claims must be understood in terms of a network of background assumptions. The second objection holds that it is this network of assumptions which bestows the very meaning on observation claims. Consequently, an observation term such as "red" will not maintain a fixed meaning throughout various changes in theories. Further, since the objection also covers observation words, the notion of ostensive words is rejected. The final objection is that our observations themselves should be looked upon as interpretations arising from these background assumptions rather than merely barren perceptions, isolated from one’s beliefs and preconceptions. The selections, most of which are well-known, specify these and other critical arguments and revisions. They are arranged into three slightly overlapping sections: "Empiricism and Ontology", "Empiricism and Science", and "Empiricism and Linguistics". Considering the purpose and scope of the book, the contributions have been appropriately chosen. An eight-page annotated bibliography is included.—B. G. H.