Two Key Differences between Science and Philosophy

Metaphilosophy 45 (1):133-135 (2014)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

C. S. Peirce made the following claim: If science reveals truth, then consensus among scientists can be expected in the limit. This article does not dispute this claim; it simply assumes it. On the basis of this assumption, the following question is asked: Is it possible to extend Peirce's claim to philosophy in a natural way? It is argued that two important differences between science and philosophy strongly militate against such an extension. Does this mean that there is no truth to be found in philosophy? Are there, perhaps, different kinds of truth (scientific, philosophical, religious, and so on)? But such questions, though related to the present investigation, are nevertheless well beyond the scope of this article

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 93,891

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Peirce on Inquiry and Truth.Thomas Edward Keith - 2001 - Dissertation, The Claremont Graduate University
On Peirce's Claim that Belief Should Be Banished from Science.Benoit Https://Orcidorg Gaultier - 2016 - Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 52 (3):390.
A Peircean Reply to Quine's Two Problems.Masato Ishida - 2013 - Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 49 (3):322.
C. S. Peirce on Miracles.Robert H. Ayers - 1980 - Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 16 (3):242 - 254.
Thomas Hobbes and the constraints that enable the imitation of God.Ted H. Miller - 1999 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 42 (2):149 – 176.

Analytics

Added to PP
2014-01-14

Downloads
31 (#503,221)

6 months
9 (#437,668)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile