Prescription Versus Description in Philosophy of Science, or Methodology Versus History: a Critical Assessment

Metaphilosophy 17 (4):289-299 (1986)
Abstract
This paper examines critically the current state of affairs in philosophy of science. It focuses on the well-Known puzzle about the relationship between the normative prescriptive methodology of science and positive descriptive history of science. This puzzle has dogged philosophers of science for over a generation and is still controversial. My conclusion is that there is really no escape from it. The best way to characterize it is as follows: "philosophy of science without history of science is empty; history of science without philosophy of science is blind."
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9973.1986.tb00391.x
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history
Request removal from index
Download options
Our Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 27,621
Through your library
References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA
Replies to Critics.Nader Chokr - 1993 - Social Epistemology 7 (4):369 – 386.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Monthly downloads

Added to index

2010-08-10

Total downloads

14 ( #332,848 of 2,169,071 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

2 ( #186,783 of 2,169,071 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature


Discussion
Order:
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.

Other forums