Some comments on “reduction”

Acta Biotheoretica 24 (3-4):163-167 (1975)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Something is wrong with current discussions about theory reduction. The question of whether higher level theories are reducible to lower level theories cannot be posed in a sensible way if methodological principles that are needed to evaluate scientific theories are disregarded. If this is recognized, the problem looses much of its alleged importance

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 93,779

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
31 (#502,424)

6 months
13 (#278,026)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

References found in this work

Philosophy of Natural Science.Carl G. Hempel - 1967 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 18 (1):70-72.
The philosophy of biology.David L. Hull & Michael Ruse (eds.) - 1973 - New York: Oxford University Press.
Approaches to reduction.Kenneth F. Schaffner - 1967 - Philosophy of Science 34 (2):137-147.
Reduction in Genetics—Biology or Philosophy?David L. Hull - 1972 - Philosophy of Science 39 (4):491-499.
Attribute identities in microreductions.Robert L. Causey - 1972 - Journal of Philosophy 69 (14):407-422.

View all 11 references / Add more references