Do We also Need Second-order Mathematics?

Constructivist Foundations 10 (1):34-35 (2014)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Open peer commentary on the article “Second-Order Science: Logic, Strategies, Methods” by Stuart A. Umpleby. Upshot: The author makes a strong plea for second-order science but somehow mathematics remains out of focus. The major claim of this commentary is that second-order science requires second-order mathematics

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 93,296

External links

  • This entry has no external links. Add one.
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Do We Need a Second-Order Science?M. A. Notturno - 2014 - Constructivist Foundations 10 (1):23-26.
The Promise and Prospects of Second-Order Science.D. Rousseau - 2014 - Constructivist Foundations 10 (1):37-38.
Observer Effects in Research.M. C. Bateson - 2014 - Constructivist Foundations 10 (1):31-32.
Science Is not Value-free.J. Stewart - 2014 - Constructivist Foundations 10 (1):28-29.
Second-Order Science is Enacted Constructivism.M. R. Lissack - 2014 - Constructivist Foundations 10 (1):35-37.
New Challenges to New Science.J. J. Hu - 2014 - Constructivist Foundations 10 (1):26-28.

Analytics

Added to PP
2014-11-15

Downloads
11 (#1,167,245)

6 months
11 (#272,000)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Jean Paul Van Bendegem
Vrije Universiteit Brussel

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references