Having majored in both philosophy and physics as an undergraduate, I specialized in the philosophy of science in graduate school–with a focus on the possibility of a “logic of scientific discovery.” Most philosophers of science have been skeptical about such a sub-discipline, restricting their theories of scientific method to the justification of already-formulated hypotheses. Others (including myself) have held that there is also a logic to the generation of hypotheses.
This is a fascinating analysis of the works of Copernicus, Kepler, Galileo, Descartes, Hobbes, Gilbert, Boyle, and Newton. It not only establishes the reasons for the triumph of the modern perspective but also accounts for certain limitations in this view that continue to characterize contemporary scientific thought.
A criticism as well as a history of the change that made possible the rise of modern science, this volume is also a guide to understanding the methods and accomplishments of the great philosopher-scientists of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries.
s/t: A Historical & Critical Essay Many books well received when originally published ultimately fail the test of time & seem outdated to future generations. Occasionally, a book seen as a solid effort when written is found later to be the definitive work on the subject. The Metaphysical Foundations of Modern Science by Edwin Arthur Burtt is such. Burtt investigates the origins of the modern scientific worldview, a view that's only a few centuries old. Concepts used to describe the world--mass, velocity, energy, time etc--form the substratum of so many modern ideas that their very ubiquity has made it hard…
Hanson’s book was received as a breath of fresh air–establishing the important distinction between what came to be called the “context of discovery” and the “context of justification.”
While the former was often relegated to the psychological phenomenon of the “aha” moment of insight, leaving the logic to the justifications of reasoning, Hanson’s treatment made philosophers of science think twice about the “intelligence” and the importance of these often spontaneous insights.
Philosophers of science have given considerable attention to the logic of completed scientific systems. In this 1958 book, Professor Hanson turns to an equally important but comparatively neglected subject, the philosophical aspects of research and discovery. He shows that there is a logical pattern in finding theories as much as in using established theories to make deductions and predictions, and he sets out the features of this pattern with the help of striking examples in the history of science.
I grew up thinking that being adopted didn’t matter. I was wrong. This book is my journey uncovering the significance and true history of adoption practices in America. Now, in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court’s overturning of Roe v. Wade, the renewed debate over women’s reproductive rights places…
This book was a milestone in the analysis of scientific thinking and progress. Rather than following the traditional approach of focusing almost entirely on the rationality and logic of scientific advance–which was taken to be continuous in nature–Kuhn stressed the more discontinuous breaks that divided successive changes in what he described as successive “paradigm-shifts” of scientific interpretation–that is, the “revolutions” that transformed its focus and fundamental concepts. These were likened to the “gestalt shifts” (discussed by Hanson) associated with fundamentally ambiguous visual perceptions. Successive scientific paradigms, Kuhn argued, were incommensurable with one another.
This interpretation sparked somewhat of an uproar. (He addressed these concerns in the 1969 postscript in this 1970 edition.) For some commentators, this book introduced a realistic humanism into the core of science, while for others, the nobility of science was tarnished by Kuhn's introduction of an irrational element into the heart of its greatest achievements.
A good book may have the power to change the way we see the world, but a great book actually becomes part of our daily consciousness, pervading our thinking to the point that we take it for granted, and we forget how provocative and challenging its ideas once were-and still are. "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions" is that kind of book. When it was first published in 1962, it was a landmark event in the history and philosophy of science. And fifty years later, it still has many lessons to teach. With "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions", Kuhn challenged long-standing…
This book begins with Kuhn's statement of his position followed by seven essays offering criticism and analysis, and finally by Kuhn's reply. It will interest senior undergraduates and graduate students of the philosophy and history of science, as well as professional philosophers, philosophically inclined scientists, and some psychologists and sociologists.
This collection provided an update to the wide reaction to Kuhn’s 1962 book by others in this field of inquiry, beginning and ending with essays by Kuhn himself.
Two books have been particularly influential in contemporary philosophy of science: Karl R. Popper's Logic of Scientific Discovery, and Thomas S. Kuhn's Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Both agree upon the importance of revolutions in science, but differ about the role of criticism in science's revolutionary growth. This volume arose out of a symposium on Kuhn's work, with Popper in the chair, at an international colloquium held in London in 1965. The book begins with Kuhn's statement of his position followed by seven essays offering criticism and analysis, and finally by Kuhn's reply. The book will interest senior undergraduates and graduate…
Everybody knows that all animals—bats, bears, sharks, ponies, and people—start out as a single cell: the fertilized egg. But how does something no bigger than the period at the end of this sentence give rise to the remarkable complexity of each of these creatures?
Hume’s skeptical arguments regarding the justification of induction are taken as a point of departure, followed by a consideration of a variety of traditional and contemporary ways of dealing with this problem.
The author then sets forth his own criteria of adequacy for interpretations of probability. Utilizing these criteria, he analyzes contemporary theories of probability, as well as the older classical and subjective interpretations.
After its publication in 1967, The Foundations of Scientific Inference taught a generation of students and researchers about the problem of induction, the interpretation of probability, and confirmation theory. Fifty years later, Wesley C. Salmon's book remains one of the clearest introductions to these fundamental problems in the philosophy of science. This anniversary edition of Salmon's foundational work features a detailed introduction by Christopher Hitchcock, which examines the book's origins, influences, and major themes, its impact and enduring effects, the disputes it raised, and its place in current studies, revisiting Salmon's ideas for a new audience of philosophers, historians, scientists,…
This book examines the nature of inquiry–the general method by which we expand our knowledge. It proposes a resolution to the paradox of inquiry, originally formulated in Plato's Meno and, most recently, the focus of the "logic of discovery" debate in the philosophy of science.
The logic of correction developed here directly opposes the claim made by evolutionary epistemologists such as Karl Popper and Donald T. Campbell that there is no such thing as a "logical method for having new ideas." "New ideas," I argue, are generated from the intelligent correction of existing ideas in response to the errors generated by them. I also argue that beyond scientific discovery, the same logic can be found in the more intimate form of inquiry we conduct as we attempt to articulate meanings for ourselves.
What were America's first prisons like? How did penal reformers, prison administrators, and politicians deal with the challenges of confining human beings in long-term captivity as punishment--what they saw as a humane intervention?
The Deviant Prison centers on one early prison: Eastern State Penitentiary. Built in Philadelphia, one of the…
When Miranda’s fiancé, Russ, is being vetted for his dream job in the U.S. attorney’s office, the couple joke that Miranda’s parents’ history as antiwar activists in the Sixties might jeopardize Russ’s security clearance. In fact, the real threat emerges when Russ’s future employer discovers that Miranda was arrested for…
