Abstract
Many controversies within philosophy of science have been attempted to be explained in terms of the metaphilosophical prescription/description distinction over the goal of philosophy of science. The aim of this paper is to show that the controversy between Popper and Kuhn about the ir/rationality of Normal Science cannot be fully explained in these terms, not even if we also take the truth/problem-solving distinction over the goal of science into account. It is argued that, to gain full understanding of this controversy, it is necessary to take into account their differences regarding a topic apparently not involved in it, namely the structure of scientific theories. The conclusion is that both Popper and Kuhn were descriptive/prescriptive at the same time in their attempt to make the rules of scientific practice explicit, yet Kuhn did it better because he had a richer and more accurate idea of what scientific theories are. Although this work is mainly a piece of history of philosophy of science, it also aims at shedding some light on epistemological issues. If the conclusion is sound, it also shows how structural aspects of scientific theories may be relevant to the epistemology of science.Keywords: Falsificationism; Normal science; Rationality; Theories; Thomas Kuhn; Karl Popper
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1016/j.shpsa.2007.06.007
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 56,999
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

The Structure of Scientific Revolutions.Thomas S. Kuhn - 1962 - University of Chicago Press.
How to Define Theoretical Terms.David Lewis - 1970 - Journal of Philosophy 67 (13):427-446.
Logic of Discovery or Psychology of Research?T. S. Kuhn - 1970 - In Imre Lakatos & Alan Musgrave (eds.), Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge. Cambridge University Press. pp. 22.

View all 18 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Kuhn, Popper, and the Superconducting Supercollider.Andrew T. Domondon - 2009 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 40 (3):301-314.
Lines of Descent: Kuhn and Beyond.Friedel Weinert - 2014 - Foundations of Science 19 (4):331-352.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Lakatos' Modification of Popper's Falsificationism.Mo Liu - 2005 - Dissertation, University of Edinburgh
Normal Science and the Extension of Theories.Jack C. Carloye - 1985 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 36 (3):241-256.
Confuting Popper on the Rationality Principle.Robert Nadeau - 1993 - Philosophy of the Social Sciences 23 (4):446-467.
Kuhn Vs. Popper on Criticism and Dogmatism in Science: A Resolution at the Group Level.Darrell Patrick Rowbottom - 2011 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 42 (1):117-124.
Popper and the Rationality Principle.Maurice Lagueux - 1993 - Philosophy of the Social Sciences 23 (4):468-480.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2010-09-02

Total views
106 ( #93,521 of 2,410,259 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
7 ( #101,569 of 2,410,259 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes