Logical reconstructionism

Philosophy of Science 17 (2):164-166 (1950)
  Copy   BIBTEX


Comments on Professor Feigl's very comprehensive review of the problem of existential hypotheses may take one of two forms. One may accept the problem in Feigl's own terms and either sympathize or criticize the realistic empiricism to which he subscribes. Or, one may feel that the entire approach is ill-founded, and hence that the distinctions in viewpoints which he draws are comparable to splits in a political party whose basic tenets are incompatible with one's own. This comment takes the second course, and as a commentary can do little more than point out the more serious of the differences which separate Feigl's views from those of the writer.



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 74,569

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 T-Schema is Not a Logical Truth.R. T. Cook - 2012 - Analysis 72 (2):231-239.
Neurath Vs. Carnap: Naturalism Vs. Rational Reconstructionism Before Quine.Thomas Uebel - 1992 - History of Philosophy Quarterly 9 (4):445 - 470.


Added to PP

29 (#399,777)

6 months
1 (#418,924)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references