The concern with the objectivity of observations is as old as empirical study itself. Protagoras’ assertion that ‘Man is the measure of all things’, though not particularly directed at observations, raised general doubts concerning the objectivity of our beliefs. In the twentieth century, the concern has been brought under the banner ‘theory-ladenness of observation’. In simple terms, since observations are conducted and formulated in theory-specific contexts, they are inadvertently imbued with the prejudices of those contexts - the terms ‘theory’ and ‘observation’ are here broadly construed. Accordingly, it is argued, observations cannot be neutral in the testing of theories.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Introduction: Perceptual Experience.Tamar Szabó Gendler - 2006 - In John Hawthorne & Tamar Szabó Gendler (eds.), Perceptual Experience. Oxford University Press. pp. 1--30.
Some Observations on a Popperian Experiment Concerning Observation.Robert Nola - 1990 - Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 21 (2):329-346.
Two Dogmas of Neo-Empiricism: The "Theory-Informity" of Observation and the Quine-Duhem Thesis.John D. Greenwood - 1990 - Philosophy of Science 57 (4):553-574.
In Defense of Experimental Data in a Relativistic Milieu.Siu L. Chow - 1995 - Philosophical Explorations.
Why Worry About Theory-Dependence? Circularity, Minimal Empiricality and Reliability.Matthias Adam - 2004 - International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 18 (2 & 3):117 – 132.
Added to index2010-04-12
Total downloads40 ( #123,812 of 2,146,978 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #226,050 of 2,146,978 )
How can I increase my downloads?
There are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.