• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文学位 >The structure and epistemic import of empirical multiple determination in scientific practice.
【24h】

The structure and epistemic import of empirical multiple determination in scientific practice.

机译：科学实践中经验多重确定的结构和认知意义。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Empirical (or experimental) multiple determination (multiple determination, for short) is the epistemic strategy of establishing the same result by means of multiple independent empirical (or experimental) procedures. It is considered to be an important epistemic virtue praised by both philosophers of science and practicing scientists. Commentators from different contexts have referred to multiple determination as one of the main strategies scientific researchers use to establish the reliability of empirical results. Multiple determination has been used in order to address a variety of problems that arise as a consequence of the fallibility of empirical and experimental procedures. It is generally believed that being able to establish the same result (or provide evidence for a hypothesis of interest) by means of different and theoretically independent procedures is "better" than doing the same by only one procedure. Despite this appeal of the multiple determination strategy, however, not much philosophical analysis has been provided regarding the grounds on which its epistemic desirability and virtues rest. Not much has been said regarding the structure and rationale underlying arguments which rely on multiple determination and there is no general agreement regarding the epistemological import of these arguments.;It is the aim of this dissertation to address these issues. More specifically, it: a. Provides a conceptual clarification of the epistemic strategy of multiple determination by making evident its differences in structure and epistemic import from other notions and epistemic strategies form which it is often not distinguished, such as Robustness, Consilience of Inductions, Variety of Evidence, etc. b. Traces the historical and philosophical roots of multiple determination in the 19th century philosophical discussions and scientific developments. Especially, it makes the claim that the emergence of empirical multiple determination as a distinctive epistemic strategy emerged as a response to the scientific and philosophical difficulties facing the atomic and molecular hypotheses of matter at the end of the 19th century. c. Provides a general conceptual framework for understanding the structure and epistemic import of arguments that rely on the application of the multiple determination strategy in actual scientific practice. d. Considers the implications of the debates regarding the structure and epistemic import of the multiple determination strategy for the relationship between history and philosophy of science.
机译：经验（或实验）多次确定（简称多次确定）是通过多个独立的经验（或实验）过程建立相同结果的认知策略。它被认为是科学哲学家和实践科学家都赞扬的重要认识论美德。来自不同背景的评论员将多重确定视为科学研究人员用来建立经验结果可靠性的主要策略之一。为了解决由于经验和实验程序的易失性而引起的各种问题，已经使用了多种确定方法。通常认为，通过不同的，理论上独立的程序能够建立相同的结果（或为感兴趣的假设提供证据）比仅通过一个程序进行相同操作“更好”。尽管多重决定策略具有吸引力，但是，关于其认识论的渴望和美德所基于的理由，没有提供太多的哲学分析。关于依赖多重确定的基础论证的结构和基本原理，人们还没有说太多，关于这些论证的认识论意义，也没有达成共识。;本论文旨在解决这些问题。更具体地说，它是：通过证明其在结构和认识论上与其他概念和认识论策略形式（通常不易区分）之间的差异，例如稳健性，归纳的一致性，证据的多样性等，对多重决定的认识论策略提供概念上的澄清。b 。追溯19世纪哲学讨论和科学发展中多重决心的历史和哲学根源。特别是，它声称经验性多重确定作为一种独特的认识论策略的出现是对19世纪末物质的原子和分子假设所面临的科学和哲学难题的回应。 C。提供了一个通用的概念框架，用于理解在实际科学实践中依赖于多重确定策略的应用的论点的结构和认识论意义。 d。考虑有关历史和科学哲学之间关系的多重决定策略的结构和认知意义的辩论的意义。

著录项

  • 作者

    Coko, Klodian.;

  • 作者单位

    Indiana University.;

  • 授予单位 Indiana University.;
  • 学科 Philosophy of science.
  • 学位 Ph.D.
  • 年度 2015
  • 页码 433 p.
  • 总页数 433
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号