|
|
This book offers a superbly clear analysis of the standard arguments for and against scientific realism. In surveying claims on both sides of the debate, Kukla organizes them in ways that expose unnoticed connections. He identifies broad patterns of error, reconciles seemingly incompatible positions, and discovers unoccupied positions with the potential to influence further debate. Kukla's overall assessment is that neither the realists nor the antirealists may claim a decisive victory.
| ISBN | 0195118650 | | Pages | 188 | | ISBN13 | 9780195118650 (What's this?) | | Volumes | 1 | | Publisher | Oxford University Press Inc | | Weight (grammes) | 474 | | Imprint | Oxford University Press Inc | | Published in | New York | | Format | Hardback | | Height (mm) | 234 | | Publication date | 01 Apr 1998 | | Width (mm) | 156 | | Library of Congress | 97027726 | | Spine width (mm) | 18 | | DEWEY | 501 | | Academic level | Professional / Scholarly | | DEWEY edition | DC21 | |
|
| |
| 1 | | The Varieties of Realism | | 3 | | 2 | | Realism and the Success of Science | | 12 | | 3 | | Realism and Scientific Practice | | 27 | | 4 | | Realism and Theoretical Unification | | 43 | | 5 | | Realism and Underdetermination I: Does Every Theory Have Empirically Equivalent Rivals? | | 58 | | 6 | | Realism and Underdetermination II: Does Empirical Equivalence Entail Underdetermination? | | 82 | | 7 | | The Vulnerability Criterion of Belief | | 92 | | 8 | | The Belief-Acceptance Distinction | | 106 | | 9 | | The Theory-Observation Distinction I: Fodor's Distinction | | 111 | | 10 | | The Theory-Observation Distinction II: Van Fraassen's Distinction | | 129 | | 11 | | The Theory-Observation Distinction III: The Third Distinction | | 143 | | 12 | | Realism and Epistemology | | 151 | | | | Notes | | 165 | | | | References | | 169 | | | | Index | | 173 |
Clearly written, well-organized and meticulously argued ... Studies in Scientific Realism is essential reading for any research student interested in the realism debate in science as that debate has evolved over the last generation, and for those scientific or philosophical professionals who think the matter was somehow settled in the course of that debate. Kukla does a masterful job of showing why it wasn't. The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science  Be the first to write a customer review
|
|
|
|
|