Reduction, representation and commensurability of theories

Philosophy of Science 56 (1):130-157 (1989)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Theories in the usual sense, as characterized by a language and a set of theorems in that language ("statement view"), are related to theories in the structuralist sense, in turn characterized by a set of potential models and a subset thereof as models ("non-statement view", J. Sneed, W. Stegmüller). It is shown that reductions of theories in the structuralist sense (that is, functions on structures) give rise to so-called "representations" of theories in the statement sense and vice versa, where representations are understood as functions that map sentences of one theory into another theory. It is argued that commensurability between theories should be based on functions on open formulas and open terms so that reducibility does not necessarily imply commensurability. This is in accordance with a central claim by Stegmüller on the compatibility of reducibility and incommensurability that has recently been challenged by D. Pearce

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,953

External links

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

Through your library

Similar books and articles

The supervenience of biological concepts.Alexander Rosenberg - 1978 - Philosophy of Science 45 (3):368-386.
Theories as Representations.Andoni Ibarra & Thomas Mormann - 1997 - Poznan Studies in the Philosophy of the Sciences and the Humanities 61:39 - 87.
On the incommensurability of theories.Jaakko Hintikka - 1988 - Philosophy of Science 55 (1):25-38.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
135 (#139,876)

6 months
27 (#113,887)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?