Towards Metamethodology: For the History and Philosophy of Science

In P. Riggs (ed.), Natural Kinds, Laws of Nature and Scientific Methodology. Kluwer Academic Publishers. pp. 103--121 (1996)
  Copy   BIBTEX


Much philosophy of science is methodology of science. How should one go about doing and evaluating it? The question is one of the methodology of methodology, i.e. of metamethodology. There is a vague thesis common to Descartes and more recent philosophers such as Quine and Lakatos: that what is good methodology, good evidence, good reason for accepting, rejecting or revising beliefs in mathematics and in the sciences properly so called, does not differ in significant kind from what is good methodology, evidence or reason elsewhere, even in epistemology and ethics; and further, that mathematics and the natural sciences provide good paradigms for methodology generally. Following von Hayek,1 I call this form of epistemological and methodological monism: Scientism.



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 93,127

External links

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

Through your library


Added to PP

17 (#896,762)

6 months
2 (#1,259,876)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

Deductivism surpassed.John Fox - 1999 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 77 (4):447 – 464.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references