Evaluation of Some Recent Debates on Scientific Progress

KİLİKYA JOURNAL OF PHILOSOPHY 1 (1):97-109 (2022)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

At first glance, what scientific progress means seems to be a quickly answered question. It is not easy to think of the sciences without progress; sciences and the notion of progress seem identical in general. Describing the nature of scientific progress is an important task that will have practical and theoretical consequences. The approach, which argues that the background on which sciences are based does not have a historical or cultural character following the positivist interpretation, accepts sciences as testing the validity of observation and experiment data to a large extent. On the other hand, the tendency that emphasizes that the complex functioning of the history of science has an indelible mark on scientific theories prefers to build sciences on a historical and social basis. How both major approaches ground the idea of scientific progress profoundly affects both our understanding of the nature of scientific knowledge and the way we do science. This paper aims to evaluate scientific progress based on the views of prominent philosophers of science in the twentieth century.

Links

PhilArchive

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

N-rays and the semantic view of scientific progress.Darrell Patrick Rowbottom - 2008 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 39 (2):277-278.
Does Scientific Progress Consist in Increasing Knowledge or Understanding?Seungbae Park - 2017 - Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 48 (4):569-579.
Scientific progress as accumulation of knowledge: a reply to Rowbottom.Bird Alexander - 2008 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 39 (2):279-281.
Bird, Kuhn and positivism.John Miles Preston - 2004 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 35 (2):327-335.
Reevaluating scientific progress as a problem resolution.Damián Islas - 2014 - Azafea: Revista de Filosofia 16:133-147.
Theory-assessment in the historiography of science.James W. McAllister - 1986 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 37 (3):315-333.
Did Kuhn kill logical empiricism?George A. Reisch - 1991 - Philosophy of Science 58 (2):264-277.
Carnap, Kuhn, and revisionism: on the publication of Structure in Encyclopedia.J. C. P. Oliveira - 2002 - Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 38 (1):147-157.
What Scientific Progress Is Not: Against Bird’s Epistemic View.Darrell Patrick Rowbottom - 2010 - International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 24 (3):241-255.
Kuhn, Relativism and Realism.Howard Sankey - 2018 - In Juha Saatsi (ed.), The Routledge Handbook of Scientific Realism. London and New York: Routledge. pp. 72-83.
What Scientific Progress Is Not: Against Bird’s Epistemic View.Darrell Patrick Rowbottom - 2010 - International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 24 (3):241-255.
Scientific Progress, Understanding, and Knowledge: Reply to Park.Finnur Dellsén - 2018 - Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 49 (3):451-459.
empiricist and neo-kantian elements in the Aufbau.Saniye Vatansever - 2020 - Beytulhikme An International Journal of Philosophy 10 (2):451-468.
The Role of Justification in the Ordinary Concept of Scientific Progress.Moti Mizrahi & Wesley Buckwalter - 2014 - Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 45 (1):151-166.

Analytics

Added to PP
2022-05-09

Downloads
125 (#141,919)

6 months
38 (#95,269)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Funda Neslioglu Serin
Ondokuz Mayis Universitesi

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

The Structure of Scientific Revolutions.Thomas S. Kuhn - 1962 - Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Edited by Ian Hacking.
Two Dogmas of Empiricism.W. Quine - 1951 - [Longmans, Green].
Scientific reasoning: the Bayesian approach.Peter Urbach & Colin Howson - 1993 - Chicago: Open Court. Edited by Peter Urbach.

View all 15 references / Add more references