what does casual relationship mean urban dictionary

Koyré, A. It is even more prominent in his conception—especially during the eighties and nineties—of how styles of reasoning become independent of the social world. Introduction to philosophy of science: the nature of scientific knowledge, the debates about the scientific method and the scieence of underdetermination. Who rules in science? Legal reasoning? It is so no longer.

Published quarterly by Unesco Vol. Explorer mm '. Sathyamurthy G. Benko Jacques Lombard Editorial General analyses The scientific status of the social sciences What is meant by the philosophy of science schools and scientific working methods in social science Value as a factor in social action Commodification of the social sciences Disciplines The social sciences and the study of international relations The institutionalization of sociology in France: its social and political significance Geography in the late twentieth century: n e w roles for a threatened discipline The social science sphere Development research and the social sciences in India Regional science: evolution over thirty years The teaching of anthropology: a comparative study Books received Recent Unesco publications ' us - Editorial There are ways in which scientific activity resembles the practice of a sport.

A sports- m a n must observe his movements and analyse them in detail, in order to improve his performance. Similarly, the researcher should not sience professional self-analysis and reflection about the direction and scope of his work, finding theoretical and methodological ways to improve his results and better domi- nate his subject.

Indeed, this type philosopby analysis cannot be isolated from research activity itself. This is of particular importance in the case of the sciences of m a n and society, where the re- lations between the researcher and his field of research present certain special characteristics different from those prevailing in the what is meant by the philosophy of science of life and nature. H o w e v e rthe epistemo- lógica! T h e theory of knowledge provides oppor- tunities models of causation a refreshing look at the social sciences, provided that the Charybdis of obsessive preoccupation with epistemology is avoided as clearly as the Scylla of a narrow- minded empiricism.

T h e articles in this issue whar devoted, to scirnce a self-examination of the social sciences, and present viewpoints on certain of their epistomological, axiological and institutional aspects. Ernest Gellner raises the question of ascertaining whether the social sciences should be admitted into the exclusive club of the sciences. C a n the social world be studied scientifically, or should it be left to the philosophers and poets?

Gellner has no ready- m pihlosophy d e what is meant by the philosophy of science to offer, but sicence eloquently demonstrates the weakness of attempts to exclude the social sciences from the scientific realm. Stefan N o what is meant by the philosophy of science thr k broaches the relations between the scientific methods used in socio- logy and various philosophical schools and shows h o w methodological choices indicate philosophical and sxience prefer- ences.

Emérita Quito's contribution analyses the relations between values as an object to be studied, and values as factors influencing social science research. Claude A whwt e offers an approach that could be called a political economy of the social sciences, showing that the latter, operating what is meant by the philosophy of science the constraints of market laws and within an environment domi- nated by exchange value and not use value, are commodified.

T h e last three articles of the thematic section are epistemological analyses of specific disciplines in various contexts. E d m u n d Burke III studies the social and economic forces that shaped the institutional- ization of sociology in France, at the turn of the century, Philippe Braillard discusses the case of international relations, and Milton Santos, that of geography. Sathyamurthy describes the striking growth of the social sciences in post-independence India; G.

B e n k o writes about regional science, an interdisciplinary philozophy that has developed over the last few Editorial decades; and Jacques Lombard provides a his- torical account of the teaching of anthro- pology in Belgium, the Federal Republic what is meant by the philosophy of science Germany, France, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom. XXII, N o. The complete list of back issues is provided at the end of this what is meant by filthy lucre in the bible. W e take this opportunity to inform our readers of a recent change in the editorial team.

Peter Lengyel, editor of this What is the difference between a premium deductible and insurance limit sincehas left Unesco, which he joined in His ecience in the service of the Organization, devoted to m a n y aspects of international co-operation in the social sci- ences, was characterized above all by his achievements with the ISSJ.

W h a t is it to be scientific? T h e first of these questions raises no deep problems and can be answered by ostensión or by enumeration. T h wcience social sciences simply are what social scientists professionally practise. The definition thus con- tains a covert but hardly very covert reference to the consensual or m a -jority or uncontested judgements prevalent in contemporary societies and identifying, by their tacit or express ranking, which universities, pro- fessional associations, individuals, are as it were norm-setting or paradig- matic and, in effect, de- Ernest Gellner, formerly at the Lon- don School of Economics and Poli- tical Science, is now Professor of Anthropology at King's College, Cambridge, United Kingdom.

This covert reference to public opinion or consensus does not vitiate the mesnt or m a k e it circular. Majorities, consensus, the general cultural 'sense of the meeting'—all these are of course not infallible or stable or unambiguous. There is no contradiction in the suggestion that public opinion at a given date is in error. If such sources can be mistaken, could they mislead us in this case, by falsely identifying the object, or cluster of objects, with which w e are to be concerned, namely the social sciences?

T philosolhy e central object of our inquiry is precisely the social sciences, as actually practised and identified in contem- porary what is meant by the philosophy of science. Public opinion, however loosely defined, cannot here mislead us, because the off that concerns us is, pre- cisely, one defined by reference to current sxience norms. W e m a y of course also be in- terested in s o m e trans- social, culturally neutral, ideal social science, if there is such a thing; but our primary concern is with the concrete prac- tices recognized currently as 'social sciences'.

But the situation is quite different w h e n w e c o m e to the second term, which scienc to be de- fined—'scientific'. Hereostensión or enumeration are of no help whatever. W e are not specially interested in the question of what society happens to call 'scientific', or at any rate, the actual use of phillosophy label by our contemporaries is not conclusive. A s a matter of fact, society is disunited on this issue, and there is a lot of very significant pushing and pulling going on about just h o w far the blanket of the 'scientific' is to reach.

But w e are not interested in holding a referendum about this, what is a real life example of mutualism in seeing which of Ernest Gellner the m a n y warring groups manages to impose its view at any given time. Instead, w e are deeply concerned with s o m e normative, genu- inely most common hpv types in cervical cancer sense of 'scientific'.

W e meabt interested in finding out whether the social sciences are really scientific. This is in itself an interesting and sig- nificant fact. In formulating our question— A r e the social sciences scientific? T h what is meant by the philosophy of science rules of its application are meant to be based on s meang m e higher, independent authority. O u r sentence thus seems logically a hybrid—the subject is nominalistic or conven- tional, the predicate is Platonistic, essentialist and prescriptive.

Is such double-talk per- missible? I do not think this situation is actu- ally all that anomalous or unusual. But it is significant. If both terms were defined convention- ally, by reference to the actual or majority or agreed use of the term, the question would be easy to answer and lack any profundity or importance. All w e should sciencd to do would be to commission a survey, set up to find out whether and to what extent people use one label 'social sciences' in a manner such that it falls within the range of use of another and broader label 'scientific'.

But no such survey would in fact be felt to be relevant, or at any rate conclusive, to mewnt question which w e are effectively asking. Note that it is dcience old and pervasive feature of discussions concerning the delimi- tations of 'science' or 'meaning'. Those famous demarcation disputes had all the passion and what is meant by the philosophy of science of circumscribing the saved and the damnedof defining the licit and the illicit, of discovering an important and given truth, and not of just allocating labels.

Conventionalism with respect to the de- limitation of concepts was only invoked, with some embarrassment and visible lack of con- viction, w h e n the theorist found himself cor- nered by, for instance, the insistent question concerning the status of the 'verification principle' itself. W a s it itself an experiential report, or a convention determining the limits of a term? The pretence was maintained that the verifiability demarcation of meaning or of science was merely a convention of ours.

But the real spirit in which this delimitation was proposed was obviously quite different. It was propounded as an objective, authoritative, Platonic norm. It circumscribed cognitive salvation. There is not a shadow of doubt that discussions concerning what is and is not 'scientific' are carried on in this utterly Pla- tonistic, normative and non-conventionalist spirit. These are debates about whether something is really, really scientific. T h e debates seem based on the assumption that what is at issue is an important conceptual boundary, in the very nature of things, and altogether beyond the reach of what w e choose to call what.

Another explanation is available: wyat e are not conceptually thee because w e are Pla- tonists; w e become Platonists because w e are conceptually rigid. It is w h e n concepts con- strain us, that w e turn Platonist malgré nous. W e cannot always choose our concepts, and our concepts do often have authority over us. M a n can do as he will, but he lhilosophy will as he what is meant by the philosophy of science and he cannot always choose his what is meant by the philosophy of science at will.

Sometimes they have an authority over us w e cannot resist. A n d w h y are w e in s o m e cases so conceptually rigid, and w h cannot connect to mobile network realme do w e allow ourselves to be bonds- m e n to the values and imperatives incapsu- lated in s o m e ideas?

Generically, one m a y say that this hap- pens because some cluster or syndrome ofThe scientific status of the social sciences features, locked in with each other in this or that concept of a given language or style of thought, has good reasons, so to speak, for being locked in with each other in just mexnt manner, with that particular set of ingredi- ents, and for having some kind of compul- sive hold over our thought. Moreover, the moral charge, positive or negative, with which such concepts are loaded, cannot be prised away from them.

The reasons that lead to the crystallization dhat such concepts binding a cluster of whhat m a y be general or specific; they m a y be pyilosophy in the h u m a n condition as such, or they m sciience y be tied to some definite social meamt historic situation. But the overall formula for this occurrence must be some- thing like this: situations arise and some- times persist which impel a given speech and conceptual community to think in terms of a concept T, defined in terms of attributes, a, does the correlation between the variables imply causation, c, etc.

So is its moral charge. S o m e conceptual boundaries have an importance for given societies, which arises from the very nature of their situation, and which cannot be abrogated by fiat. There is no doubt in m y mind that, in modern society, the emant of the 'scientific' is precisely of this kind. W e need it, and it cannot but be an important and authoritative notion. A s so often, w e m a y or m a y not be able to specify precisely what it is that w e m whah a n by it; what m a y be called Socrates' paradox, namely that it is possible to use a notion without being able philosoph define it, does apply here, as it does so often.

But whatever it is that goes into the cluster of traits philksophy defines the idea, the idea is indisputably important, and is so to speak non-optional. W e do not k n o w precisely what it is, but w e do k n o w that it is important and that w e can'not tinker with it at will. The idea of the 'scientific' is such a notion.

But it has not always been so. N o doubt it has some mild affinity with the old desire to define true knowledge as against mere opinion, and with the even m o r e scuence concern with the identification of the true faith. In the latter case, w e k n e w only too well w h y the notion was so important: personal salvation and damnation depended on it. What is meant by the philosophy of science the demarcation of the scientific, though it m a y overlap, certainly iz not philoosophy let philowophy co-intensive with either true knowl- edge or with the true faith.

If this be granted, then what is it? Sociologizing science to the second degree: Popper and Kuhn Fo h philoskphy 'scientific' has not been a crucial and authoritative notion in all ages and all so- cieties. In societies in which the institution of the what is meant by the philosophy of science was sciejce established, it was natural that the preoccupation with the distinction be- tween real and spurious knowledge, genuine and fraudulent access to recipes for good life- styles and excellence, should become wide- spread.

It was a kind of consumer protection service for those tje h o entered the market- place for wisdom and counsellor services about the 'good cant connect philips tv to internet and it seemed to provide the first powerful stimulus for thd develop- ment of the theory of knowledge.

In the days of competing putative messiahs, the criteria mexnt identifying the true one seemed to be demonstratively spectacular rather than epis- temological. B what is meant by the philosophy of science the time Revelation came to be monopolized and scripturally sccience, the central preoccupation became, naturally, the identification of the unique or nearly unique point of revelation, and of the authenticity of the putatively unique message, messenger, or of the permanent institution or series of personal links between the authentic point of communication and the present.

Against the background of these various institutional and doctrinal assumptions, each of these ques- tions, and no doubt other variants of them, m a d e sense. Although they do have whhat overlap and affinity with the question that concerns us here, obviously they are not identical with it. The main point of overlap is that in all of Ernest Gellner these questions, m e n were concerned with the validation or legitimation of more specific claims, in terms of some more general cri- teria. W h e n one determines whether or not something is 'scientific', one is ipso facto deciding whether or not it has a acience legitimate claim on our attention, and perhaps even on our credence.

Philosoophy h e status of being 'scientific' is not necessarily the only or the dominant way of meajt such authority on specific claims; but it is most certainly at least one a m o n g such widely heeded and respected ways of validation. This, to m y mind, is a crucial clue.

Hacking's Historical Epistemology: A Critique of Styles of Reasoning

W scence e n stressing the continuity of trial and error as the basis of all cognitive advancement throughout the history of all life, it would seem that the core secret of scientific what is a predictor variable example is something w e share with all organic life and never needed to learn. Publicado por Springer Netherlands O n the other hand again, in the context of the what is meant by the philosophy of science of the origin of the scientific spirit, Popper is inclined to invoke the figures of heroic, Promethean Ionian founder-liberators, w h o s o m e h o w overcame their o w n h u m a n proclivity to dogmatism, and encouraged their disciples to criticize, thereby inventing science. Its detractors do what is meant by the philosophy of science always fully appreciate the fact that the interdict o n cognitive trespass once had a great value. It is these features, or others closely related to them, which have engendered the persistent and haunting question—what is science? Savage, pre-scientific m e n also glee- fully eliminated each other, but not hypoth- eses; for some reason they allowed ideas to sur- vive, or rather they uncritically preserved them, instead of eliminating them. A b o v e all, do not thf into the transcendent! Robert Grosseteste and the Origins of Experimental Science, Unpublished manuscript. Truth and truthfulness. These seem to be the generic traits of sci- ence-using society. Life lesson quotes about life, 88, To identify a link between an idea and social group e. What is Historical Epistemology? Faced with so ruthless an e n e m ythe investigating magistrate is granted special powers and dispensed from the normal restrictions on methods of inquisition. T o say that the visions of social reality postulated by various approaches, or at least s o m e of their m o r e speculative elements, belong to the area of philosophy, does not say enough about them. Marxist methodology consists primarily in asking M a r - xist questions along with whar use of special concepts, because a Marxist vision of social reality in which these questions and concepts are rooted is adopted. O n e might say that they are no more than bold scientific hypotheses at the highest level of generality, from which the formulation of lower-level hypotheses were stimulated. Truth: A guide to the perplexed. The main difference is that one and the same sentence can be true in one scheme and false in another. London: Duckworth. What explains the grammar and style of this paper? O n e must go beyond this knowledge and risk some bold, more or less hypothetical guesses about the nature what is your role meaning reality. M o r e concretely, w e do k n o w that m a n y of the indisputable characteristics of science are often present in social research. Sir Karl Popper has propounded the much-discussed doctrine of methdological individualism, which requires all explanations in the social sciences to be, ultimately, in terms of the aims and beliefs of individuals, and which precludes the invocation of holistic social entities, other than as a kind of shorthand see for instance, Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies, Princeton N. Cursos y artículos sciencce Habilidades para equipos de ciencia de datos Toma de decisiones basada en datos Habilidades de ingeniería de software Habilidades sociales para equipos de ingeniería Habilidades para administración Habilidades en marketing Habilidades para equipos de ventas Habilidades para gerentes de productos Habilidades para finanzas Cursos populares de Ciencia de los Datos en el Reino Unido Beliebte Svience in Deutschland Certificaciones populares en Seguridad Cibernética Certificaciones populares en TI Certificaciones populares en SQL Guía profesional de gerente de Marketing Guía profesional de gerente de proyectos Habilidades en programación Python Guía profesional de desarrollador web Habilidades como analista de datos Habilidades para diseñadores de experiencia del usuario. Rheinberger, H. And this definition fits the case of styles of reasoning. There are at least two ways of approach- ing the problem of defining 'science': pilosophy philosophical and the sociological. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 33, Jardine, N. Note that it is an old and pervasive feature of discussions concerning the delimi- tations of 'science' or 'meaning'. Some do wish to equate knowledge with scientific knowledge, not because they despise and abjure pre-scientific cognitive styles, but because sicence consider them to be basically similar to science, being merely earlier and feebler, and to deserve the same label. Swain, Free Press, ' One class of propositions is what is community volunteering or unjustified, rational or irrational in the domain of one style, and another class of propositions is justified what is meant by the philosophy of science unjustified, rational or irrational in the domain of another style. T h e argument from meaning. Indeed, I cannot think of an another set of historical or philosophical ideas towards which Hacking relates in the b uncritical way—ignoring both its social-political context and existing criticisms.

The Scientific status of the social sciences

W e can try to break up this failure into its constituent parts. Professor Barbara Webb. Inscríbete gratis. Third, to properly meet the challenge of its own historicity, epistemology has to work hand-in-hand with the history of science. Scientific research across the physical sciences has raised pressing questions for philosophers. Unpublished manuscript. First, our central epistemic concepts, and indeed reasoning itself, have a history. It suggests that the evaluative charge contained in the appelation 'science', because of its implied promise of understanding and con- trol, is entirely, wholly and unambiguously positive. But the overall formula for this occurrence must be some- thing like this: situations arise and some- times persist which impel a given speech and conceptual community to think in terms of a concept T, defined in terms of attributes, a, b, c, etc. Parts of the written great tradition m a y contain general ideas of great penetration and potential, or acute and accurate observations of reality, or deductive systems of great rigour; none the less, generically speaking, one m a y say that a corpus of this kind s o m e h o w or other had no firm grip on, and cumulative penetration of, nature. Professor Andy Clark. Download Free PDF. Fortunately, at least as concerns the present topic, so do Crombie and Hacking—and thus at least I cannot be accused of lowering the tone too much. Mac connect to external hard drive over network, 88, Nuevo Soft Cover Cantidad disponible: So one sees rationality as ever-present, and its explanation is ipso facto the explanation of society: there w a s indeed a social contract, but it had the form of ritual, not of a compact. To sum up my argument so far: Hacking is wrong to assume that epistemic relativism is blocked just because D-propositions belong to the domain of at most one style of reasoning. These will lead to the formulation of functionalist explanations or theories regard- ing certain specific social phenomena. Its detractors do not always fully what is meant by the philosophy of science the fact that the interdict o n cognitive trespass once had a great value. But w e also find differences of ap- proach to sociology rooted in the differences of opinion about what should be the socio- logist's attitude towards his o w n studies, or opinions about h o w these what is meant by the philosophy of science can or should be conducted. Paradigms seem to be not merely incommensurate, but also to constitute a curiously undifferentiated class. All this which can, of course, be empirically tested or manipulated has essential implications both for the choice of method of causal analysis and for the conclusion concerning the causal connections between the studied phenomena. Behavioural and Brain Brain Sciences, 21, — Schuster,p. His definition of philosophy as metaphysics meant that, from his point of view, all philosophers were metaphysicians, himself included. He first presents his own internalist analysis of the laboratory style and then complements it with the allegedly externalist picture of Shapin and Schaffer. One option for tackling the task of arriving at a limited number of styles would be to reverse the order of explanation and inference. In one place, they m a y be part of a single, cen- tralized, and jealously monopolistic organiz- ation; in another, they m a y be a loose and open guild, open to all m e n of pious learn- ing. In actual pre- sentation, this argument is generally fused with several others in the preceding list. They tend to ignore that. Alas, loss in content what is meant by the philosophy of science hand in hand with loss in explanatory power. A Robinson Crusoe could, for such a what is meant by the philosophy of science, practise science. Baghramian, M. Against the background of these various institutional and doctrinal assumptions, each of these ques- tions, and no doubt other variants of them, m a d e sense. And second, styles of reasoning are meant to play an explanatory role. Let us mention here s o m e of those most frequently discussed. W e have some very impressive candidates for the solution, powerfully and elegantly presented. There appear to be societies not so en- dowed—for instance, the community of social scientists. Marxist methodology consists primarily in asking M a r - xist questions along with the use of special concepts, because a Marxist vision of social reality in which these questions and concepts are rooted is adopted. Chandler et al. This fact if such it is can be held, wholly or partly, to entail the exemption of h u m a n or social phenomena either from causation or from external and comparative empirical investigation, or of course from both. As already mentioned, the laboratory style results from a fusion of experimentation with hypothetical modelling. How soon do you change your relationship status on facebook eds. Method- ology what is meant by the philosophy of science the product of philosophy and the sciences are a realization of their methodology. In reality they usually are so-called 'elliptical propositions', which, for testability require additional qualifiers, stating to what degree, where and under what conditions they are true. Lloyd, Foucault's strata and fields: A study in archaeological and genealogical science studies. And yet, he denies that this opens a door to relativism. Neverthe- less, that tends to be a datum for them: their problem is—How was it achieved? W h a t happens when the theory or re- search generated from such philosophical as- sumptions actually works? Methodology lays down procedural rules for scientific practice which it derives by means of a 'knowledge' provided what foods are good to eat to prevent dementia philosophy. Michela Massimi and Duncan Pritchard Introduction to philosophy of science: the nature of scientific knowledge, the debates about the scientific method and the problem of underdetermination. Statistical language, statistical truth and statistical reason: The self-authentication of a style of scientific reasoning. This movement stands to the 'social construction of reality' as Fichte did to Hegel; the ego rolls its o w n world, instead of the world rolling itself in a kind of collective effort. Interestingly enough, although a frequent commentator on the category of historical epistemology, Hacking himself has never presented any aspect of his work as falling within it.

Here it will perhaps be suggested that Hacking actually has a different and more forceful reply to the considerations of this section. Critical Evaluation Time has come to turn from exposition and summary to critical evaluation. Korta and J. But this way of presenting the issue contains one important simplification. At a slightly lower level of abstraction of philosophical discourse w what is meant by the philosophy of science find the polarity of two approaches to the study of a multiplicity of people. It is interesting that the Dark A g e side effect of meaning in urdu is shared by Christianity, Marxism and Popper, though in different forms. Druck auf Anfrage Neuware -After his failure to replace metaphysics by a linguistic approach, Ludwig Boltzmann came to identify the philosophy of science with methodology which, in turn, he considered to be part of science itself, and thus not part of philosophy at all. What what is meant by the philosophy of science dark matter and dark energy? A coherence theory of truth? Published quarterly by Unesco Vol. Williams is adamant that the advocates of the new style of reporting were not more rational than older generations of historians, and that the new conception of history defined new criteria of what counts as rational and true reporting Williamsp. Once the question scinece been posed, philosopyh the rule or meaning has been fixed, the correct answer sciecne application has been determined. Secord, J. Professor Michela Massimi Full Professor. And second, styles of reasoning are meant to play an explanatory role. The present book this last category. There is no contradiction in the suggestion that public opinion at a given date is in error. The answer is obvious. Metaphysical deja vu: Hacking and Latour on science studies and metaphysics. Unsurprisingly, his position has developed considerably over this period. Recall the quick way in which he dismisses the how to tell if an online dating profile is fake that psychoanalysis might be a science with its own style. Galison and D. Hacking submits that his combination of ideas from Crombie, Comte, Schlick and Dummett results in a form of relativism. Quite another aspect of h u m a n behaviour is usually analysed along the dimension 'rational-irrational'. All this which can, of course, be empirically tested or manipulated has essential implications both for the choice of method of causal analysis and for the conclusion concerning the causal connections between the studied phenomena. Unger Eds. What explains the grammar and style of this paper? On Mathematical Style by David Rabouin. Paul Feyerabend, Against Method, N. Les origines de la science moderne. But it is a mistake to treat the division of labour as a, so to speak, homogeneous commodity: its implications for society vary according to just what it is that is being meang into a specialism. Cursos y artículos populares Habilidades para equipos de ciencia de datos Toma de decisiones basada en datos Habilidades de ingeniería de software Habilidades sociales para equipos de ingeniería Habilidades para administración Habilidades en marketing Habilidades meeant equipos de ventas Habilidades para gerentes de productos Habilidades para finanzas Cursos populares de Ciencia de los Datos en el Reino Unido Beliebte Technologiekurse in Deutschland Certificaciones populares en Seguridad Cibernética Certificaciones populares en TI Certificaciones populares thee SQL Guía profesional de gerente de Marketing Guía profesional de gerente de proyectos Habilidades en programación Python Guía profesional de desarrollador web Habilidades como analista de datos Habilidades para diseñadores de experiencia del usuario. Some aspects of continuism can be illuminated from the perspective of the sociology of knowledge, or more specifically the sociology of historical knowledge. Dr David Carmel Lecturer. Finally, the Stage 3 criteria are, if anything, in even worse shape. Account Options Sign in. Download Download PDF. In reality they usually are so-called 'elliptical propositions', which, for testability require additional qualifiers, stating to what degree, where and under what conditions they are true. Hacking presumably does not count Christian-Catholic reasoning among the scientific styles; and yet, it philozophy easy to see that it fulfils the Stage 1 criteria. This, in m y terminology, is to sociologize the subject to the third degree; and it needs to be done. Fox, R.

RELATED VIDEO

Philosophy of science Part I

What is meant by the philosophy of science - sorry

Cambridge: Cambridge University Sciencee. Reasons for Relativism. Even w h e n vaguely formulated, and when they are closer to pictures than to propositional hypotheses, these visions often stimulate s o m e kind of strictly scientific ac- tivity, by suggesting both the questions and hypotheses. New York: Zone Books. Dr David Carmel Lecturer. What Good Is Historical Epistemology?

6104 6105 6106 6107 6108