University of Chicago Press (1999)
Debate over the nature of science has recently moved from the halls of academia into the public sphere, where it has taken shape as the "science wars." At issue is the question of whether scientific knowledge is objective and universal or socially mediated, whether scientific truths are independent of human values and beliefs. Ronald Giere is a philosopher of science who has been at the forefront of this debate from its inception, and Science without Laws offers a much-needed mediating perspective on an increasingly volatile line of inquiry. Giere does not question the major findings of modern science: for example, that the universe is expanding or that inheritance is carried by DNA molecules with a double helical structure. But like many critics of modern science, he rejects the widespread notion of science--deriving ultimately from the Enlightenment--as a uniquely rational activity leading to the discovery of universal truths underlying all natural phenomena. In these highly readable essays, Giere argues that it is better to understand scientists as merely constructing more or less abstract models of limited aspects of the world. Such an understanding makes possible a resolution of the issues at stake in the science wars. The critics of science are seen to be correct in rejecting the Enlightenment idea of science, and its defenders are seen to be correct in insisting that science does produce genuine knowledge of the natural world. Giere is utterly persuasive in arguing that to criticize the Enlightenment ideal is not to criticize science itself, and that to defend science one need not defend the Enlightenment ideal. Science without Laws thus stakes out a middle ground in these debates by showing us how science can be better conceived in other ways.
|Keywords||Science Philosophy Realism|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Buy the book||$3.24 used (88% off) $18.88 new (25% off) $25.00 direct from Amazon Amazon page|
|Call number||Q175.G48898 1999|
|ISBN(s)||0226292088 9780226292083 0226292088 (alk. paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
When Scientific Models Represent.Daniela M. Bailer-Jones - 2003 - International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 17 (1):59 – 74.
Idealized, Inaccurate but Successful: A Pragmatic Approach to Evaluating Models in Theoretical Ecology. [REVIEW]Jay Odenbaugh - 2004 - Biology and Philosophy 20 (2-3):231-255.
Similar books and articles
Instrumental Rationality and Naturalized Philosophy of Science.Harvey Siegel - 1996 - Philosophy of Science 63 (3):124.
Review Essay: Perspectival Realism, Representational Models, and the Social Sciences.Thomas Brante - 2010 - Philosophy of the Social Sciences 40 (1):107-117.
Models and Perspectives on Stage: Remarks on Giere's Scientific Perspectivism.Matthew J. Brown - 2009 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 40 (2):213-220.
The Constructive Realist Account of Science and its Application to Ilya Prigogine's Conception of Laws of Nature.Ave Mets & Piret Kuusk - 2009 - Foundations of Science 14 (3):239-248.
Naturalism and the Enlightenment Ideal : Rethinking a Central Debate in the Philosophy of Social Science.Daniel Steel & S. Kedzie Hall - 2010 - In P. D. Magnus & Jacob Busch (eds.), New Waves in Philosophy of Science. Palgrave-Macmillan.
Viewing Science.Ronald N. Giere - 1994 - PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1994:3 - 16.
Using Models to Represent Reality.Ronald N. Giere - 1999 - In L. Magnani, N. J. Nersessian & P. Thagard (eds.), Model-Based Reasoning in Scientific Discovery. Kluwer/Plenum. pp. 41--57.
Nonsense on Stilts: How to Tell Science From Bunk.Massimo Pigliucci - 2010 - University of Chicago Press.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads119 ( #38,190 of 2,132,879 )
Recent downloads (6 months)5 ( #173,992 of 2,132,879 )
How can I increase my downloads?
There are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.