Do We Need a Hierarchical Model of Science?
Batens (Diderik)
Source: Earman (John), Ed. - Inference, Explanation and Other Philosophical Frustrations
Paper - Abstract

Paper StatisticsDisclaimer


Editor’s Introduction1

  1. Diderik Batens gives a resounding "No" to his query "Do We Need a Hierarchical Model of Science?" In place of both hierarchical and holistic models he proposes a contextualistic approach in which problems are always formulated and attacked with respect to a localized problem-solving situation rather than with respect to the full-knowledge situation.
  2. On Batens's account, methodological rules as well as empirical assertions are contextual. This has the interesting consequence that no a priori arguments can demonstrate the superiority of science to astrology; rather the superiority has to be shown on a case-by-case basis in a range of concrete problem-solving contexts.

Comment:

Part II - Thories and Explanations



In-Page Footnotes

Footnote 1: Taken from "Earman (John) - Inference, Explanation and Other Philosophical Frustrations: Introduction".


Text Colour Conventions (see disclaimer)

  1. Blue: Text by me; © Theo Todman, 2018
  2. Mauve: Text by correspondent(s) or other author(s); © the author(s)



© Theo Todman, June 2007 - Sept 2018. Please address any comments on this page to theo@theotodman.com. File output:
Website Maintenance Dashboard
Return to Top of this Page Return to Theo Todman's Philosophy Page Return to Theo Todman's Home Page