Philosophy of Science
Basicly deals with following question:
What is a scientific explanation ?
To what extent can scientific claims ever be justified or
shown to be false ?
How do scientific theories change over time ?
What relations hold between old and new theories ?
What relations hold between theoretical claims
developed in different fields of scientific investigation?
Most scientists, ..... simply adopt a philosophy of
science that is popular, or that suits their purposes,
and cite it as autority. This proclivity to borrow
positions from philosophy is rather common but poses
serious dangers because what may be quite controversial
in philosophy may be accepted by a particular scientist
or group of scientists without recognizing its contraversial
character.
W.Bechtel Philosophy of Science
p 1,2
Note: This is quite a good introductory book into
Philosophy of Science and related subjects,
I'll be quoting from it to prepare a ground
of argument in a perspective with you. The
arguments I have started with Orhan and others
here has been quite successful as far as I am
concerned, but if we do it more systematically
it would be better. I wish another person who
is well versed in logic to conduct similar efforts
at the same time to broden the base of the arguments.
I don't have time to do both at the same time.
(This refers to USENET discussions under
my other name Grand Sen~or)
Hiç yorum yok:
Yorum Gönder