Ordinary Language Philosophy, Explanation, and the Historical Turn in Philosophy of Science

Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 90 (December 2021):77 - 85 (2021)
  Copy   BIBTEX


Taking a cue from remarks Thomas Kuhn makes in 1990 about the historical turn in philosophy of science, I examine the history of history and philosophy of science within parts of the British philosophical context in the 1950s and early 1960s. During this time, ordinary language philosophy's influence was at its peak. I argue that the ordinary language philosophers' methodological recommendation to analyze actual linguistic practice influences several prominent criticisms of the deductive-nomological model of scientific explanation and that these criticisms relate to the historical turn in philosophy of science. To show these connections, I primarily examine the work of Stephen Toulmin, who taught at Oxford from 1949 to 1954, and Michael Scriven, who completed a dissertation on explanation under Gilbert Ryle and R.B. Braithwaite in 1956. I also consider Mary Hesse's appeal to an ordinary language-influenced account of meaning in her account of the role of models and analogies in scientific reasoning, and W.H. Watson's Wittgensteinian philosophy of science, an early influence on Toulmin. I think there are two upshots to my historical sketch. First, it fills out details of the move away from logical positivism to more historical- and practice-focused philosophies of science. Second, questions about linguistic meaning and the proper targets and aims of philosophical analysis are part and parcel of the historical turn, as well as its reception. Looking at the philosophical background during which so-called linguistic philosophers also had a hand in bringing these questions to prominence helps us understand why.



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 86,507

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

Ordinary Language Criticisms of Logical Positivism.Paul L. Franco - 2018 - Hopos: The Journal of the International Society for the History of Philosophy of Science 8 (1):157-190.
Artificial Language Philosophy of Science.Sebastian Lutz - 2011 - European Journal for Philosophy of Science 2 (2):181–203.
Doing philosophy with words.Brian Weatherson - 2007 - Philosophical Studies 135 (3):429 - 437.
Contemporary ordinary language philosophy.Nat Hansen - 2014 - Philosophy Compass 9 (8):556-569.
Frege and Natural Language.Andrew Rein - 1985 - Philosophy 60 (234):513 - 524.
The Origins of the Distinction Between the Notions of Explanation and Understanding in Philosophy of Science and History of the Nineteenth Century.Mykola Bakaiev - 2020 - Наукові Записки Наукма: Філософія Та Релігієзнавство 5:60–68.
Ordinary Language Philosophy.Sally Parker-Ryan - 2012 - Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Psychological concepts, explication, and ordinary language.Hilary Putnam - 1957 - Journal of Philosophy 54 (February):94-99.


Added to PP

54 (#251,021)

6 months
11 (#108,125)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Paul L. Franco
University of Washington

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Two Dogmas of Empiricism.Willard V. O. Quine - 1951 - Philosophical Review 60 (1):20–43.
On referring.Peter F. Strawson - 1950 - Mind 59 (235):320-344.
Two Dogmas of Empiricism.W. V. Quine - 1951 - Philosophical Review 60 (1):20-43.
Four Decades of Scientific Explanation.Wesley C. Salmon & Anne Fagot-Largeault - 1989 - History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences 16 (2):355.
A plea for excuses.John Austin - 1957 - Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 57:1--30.

View all 35 references / Add more references