Cantitate/Preț
Produs
Total produse
Vezi coșul
Understanding Inconsistent Science de Peter Vickers

Understanding Inconsistent Science

Autor Peter Vickers
en Limba Engleză Hardback – 22 aug 2013

În volumul Understanding Inconsistent Science, Peter Vickers propune o reevaluare radicală a modului în care cercetătorii și filosofii raportează succesul empiric la rigoarea logică. Aplicabilitatea practică a acestui studiu rezidă în demontarea ideii că teoriile științifice funcționează ca entități monolitice; în schimb, autorul ne îndeamnă să privim mecanismele interne ale științei prin prisma detaliilor istorice specifice, nu prin generalizări abstracte. Observăm o critică argumentată la adresa curentului care susține că știința este utilă în ciuda inconsistențelor interne, Vickers demonstrând că majoritatea acestor 'inconsistențe' apar doar atunci când reconstruim episoadele istorice prea departe de realitatea faptelor.

Analizând opt studii de caz, autorul introduce o filosofie particularistă. Găsim în această carte o invitație de a elimina termenul de 'teorie' din dezbaterile metateoretice pentru a stopa disputele terminologice care nu produc progres. Cititorii familiarizați cu Inconsistency in Science de Joke Meheus vor aprecia modul în care Vickers rafinează problema, trecând de la logica paraconsistentă la o analiză contextuală mult mai granulată a practicii științifice. Spre deosebire de abordările care caută reguli universale, precum cele din General Philosophy of Science: Focal Issues, acest volum prioritizează diferențele dramatice dintre diversele ramuri ale științei.

Această lucrare ocupă un loc central în opera autorului, făcând tranziția de la analiza realismului științific din Contemporary Scientific Realism către o metodologie de protejare a validității științei în fața scepticismului, temă dezvoltată ulterior în Identifying Future-Proof Science. Este o lectură densă, dar accesibilă, care recalibrează așteptările academice de la istoria și filosofia științei.

Citește tot Restrânge

Preț: 56235 lei

Preț vechi: 61668 lei
-9%

Puncte Express: 844

Carte disponibilă

Livrare economică 28 mai-03 iunie

 Adaugă în coș

Wish list
Gift list
Am citit!
Adaugă în listă

Specificații

ISBN-13: 9780199692026
ISBN-10: 0199692025
Pagini: 288
Dimensiuni: 177 x 238 x 23 mm
Greutate: 0.57 kg
Editura: OUP OXFORD
Colecția OUP Oxford
Locul publicării:Oxford, United Kingdom

De ce să citești această carte

Această carte este esențială pentru studenții și cercetătorii în filosofia științei care doresc să depășească modelele teoretice rigide. Cititorul câștigă o înțelegere profundă a modului în care știința progresează real, dincolo de idealizările logice. Este un argument solid pentru o abordare particularistă, oferind instrumente critice pentru a analiza validitatea descoperirilor științifice fără a cădea în capcana generalizărilor pripite.

Despre autor

Peter Vickers este un filosof al științei recunoscut pentru abordările sale pragmatice și istorice asupra realismului științific. Lucrările sale, publicate în mare parte la OUP Oxford, explorează tensiunea dintre teoriile trecute care au eșuat și succesul predictiv al științei contemporane. Prin volume precum Identifying Future-Proof Science, el s-a impus ca o voce importantă în apărarea integrității științifice în fața scepticismului modern. Activitatea sa academică se concentrează pe modul în care detaliile istorice pot informa și corecta modelele filosofice abstracte despre cunoaștere.

Descriere

In recent years philosophers of science have urged that many scientific theories are extremely useful and successful despite being internally inconsistent. Via an investigation of eight alleged 'inconsistent theories' in the history of science, Peter Vickers urges that this view is at best overly simplistic. Most of these cases can only be described as examples of 'inconsistent science' if we employ reconstructions of science which depart from the real (history of) science to an unacceptable degree. And where we do find genuine inconsistency he argues that the nature of--and correct response to--the inconsistency differs dramatically depending on the details of the science in question. Thus we are warned against making overly general claims about 'science': what are all called 'theories' in the history of science are actually significantly different entities, which work in different ways and react to inconsistency in different ways. Vickers argues that the traditional goal of philosophy to make substantial, fully general claims about 'how science works' is misguided, and can be significantly circumvented if we re-frame our debates such that reference to 'theories' is eliminated. In this way one is not tempted to think of the history of science as a history of instances of the same kind--theory--about which one could hope to say something substantial and general. And in addition eliminating theory means that we avoid fruitless debates about the 'real' nature and content of 'theories'. Vickers' account leads to a particularist philosophy of science, where the reader is urged to appreciate the often dramatic differences between the different 'inconsistencies in science' which have been identified.

Recenzii

[T]he book is a remarkable achievement both in its breadth and in its depth. Vickers offers by some margin the most comprehensive and detailed discussion of inconsistency in physics of which I am aware ... [T]his is an important book.
I strongly encourage and see great potential for this work and, given the high standards of his current publications, we can all look forward to seeing what Vickers and his colleagues come up with next.
[H]is case studies provide good material for beginning to evaluate his theory eliminativism, which I find the most interesting theme in the book. It is worth emphasizing that the book is very clearly written and easy to read, without too much unnecessary formalism or jargon. I expect that anyone interested in the philosophy of science would profit from reading it.
Vickers' book is a paradigm of philosophical engagement with issues that are, or ought to be, of real concern to working scientists and to scientically engaged laypersons.
Given the historical rigour with which his case studies are examined, as well as the methodological novelty of his approach, Vickers's work is certain to trigger a number of debates in the philosophical community, starting from those on historical details of the presented episodes, to discussions on formal logic and its application to scientific reasoning. For these reasons alone it is safe to say that Vickers's book is from now on a necessary reference for any scholar of these problem fields. Moreover, given the complexity of the topic and its relevance for other philosophical disciplines, the book is a highly welcome contribution not only to the literature on inconsistencies in science, but to logic, epistemology and methodology of science in general
Understanding Inconsistent Science is a necessary inquiry into allegedly inconsistent science, which Vickers has executed with care and caution, and which has earned him the honourable title: Slayer of the iMongers
The method is original and convincing, and the case studies well researched and compelling ... overall then, this is a very creative text, and useful for both those directly interested in the inconsistency debates and also those looking for a novel approach to solving other problems in philosophy of science
The cases themselves are fascinating, and Vickers's treatment is systematic, detailed, and rigorous ... Understanding Inconsistent Science [is] a book that I warmly recommend
Vickers's book provides a much-needed organization and clarification of the issues at hand-what we mean by claiming a scientific theory to be contradictory, and which sorts of cases and examples best illustrate these issues-and is an important prolegomenon to any future work in this area.
Peter Vickers's monograph stands out as a very serious piece of scholarship in historically- and scientifically-informed philosophy of science. It is to be strongly recommended to both philosophers (of science) and reflectively inclined scientists, especially physicists and mathematicians.
Vicker's treatment of the examples is detailed and well-referenced, while also being admirably accessible, even for an audience that lacks a full grasp of the science and mathematics involved ... the book makes a substantial contribution to the literature: gathering these eight examples together in a well-referenced discussion provides an excellent starting point for anyone interested in thinking about inconsistency in science.

Notă biografică

Peter Vickers completed his undergraduate BSc in Mathematics and Philosophy at the University of York in 2003. This was followed by an MA in History and Philosophy of Science at the University of Leeds, completed in 2005, and a PhD in the history and philosophy of science, also at the University of Leeds in 2009. Following a year teaching at Leeds, Vickers spent a year as a Postdoctoral Fellow at the Center for Philosophy of Science at the University of Pittsburgh, before returning to the UK in 2011 as a Lecturer in Philosophy at Durham University.