Sebastian Lutz
Uppsala University
I defend the Received View on scientific theories as developed by Carnap, Hempel, and Feigl against a number of criticisms based on misconceptions. First, I dispute the claim that the Received View demands axiomatizations in first order logic, and the further claim that these axiomatizations must include axioms for the mathematics used in the scientific theories. Next, I contend that models are important according to the Received View. Finally, I argue against the claim that the Received View is intended to make the concept of a theory more precise. Rather, it is meant as a generalizable framework for explicating specific theories.
Keywords received view  syntactic view  semantic view  axiomatization  explication  scientific models
Categories (categorize this paper)
Reprint years 2012
DOI 10.1086/664460
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: 71,410
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Laws and Symmetry.Bas C. Van Fraassen - 1989 - Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
Meaning and Necessity: A Study in Semantics and Modal Logic.Rudolf Carnap - 1947 - Chicago, IL, USA: University of Chicago Press.
The Scientific Image.C. Van Fraassen Bas - 1980 - Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.

View all 130 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

What Was the Syntax‐Semantics Debate in the Philosophy of Science About?Sebastian Lutz - 2017 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 95 (2):319-352.
The Structure of Scientific Theories.Rasmus Grønfeldt Winther - 2015 - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
The Role of Symmetry in the Interpretation of Physical Theories.Adam Caulton - 2015 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part B: Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 52 (Part B):153-162.

View all 21 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

What’s Wrong with the Received View of Evolutionary Theory?John Beatty - 1980 - PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1980:397 - 426.
What Scientific Theories Could Not Be.Hans Halvorson - 2012 - Philosophy of Science 79 (2):183-206.
In Defense of the Received View.Steffen Borge - 2013 - Philosophical Psychology 26 (6):863 - 887.
Models and Theories I: The Semantic View Revisited.Chuang Liu - 1997 - International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 11 (2):147 – 164.
The Semantic View, If Plausible, Is Syntactic.Hans Halvorson - 2013 - Philosophy of Science 80 (3):475-478.
Sociobiology and the Semantic View of Theories.Barbara L. Horan - 1986 - PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1986:322 - 330.
Defending the Semantic View: What It Takes.Soazig Le Bihan - 2012 - European Journal for Philosophy of Science 2 (3):249-274.


Added to PP index

Total views
181 ( #65,849 of 2,519,807 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
12 ( #62,203 of 2,519,807 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes