...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Studies in history and philosophy of science >History and scientific practice in the construction of an adequate philosophy of science: revisiting a Whewell/Mill debate
【24h】

History and scientific practice in the construction of an adequate philosophy of science: revisiting a Whewell/Mill debate

机译：建构适当科学哲学的历史和科学实践：回顾Whewell / Mill辩论

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

William Whewell raised a series of objections concerning John Stuart Mill's philosophy of science which suggested that Mill's views were not properly informed by the history of science or by adequate reflection on scientific practices. The aim of this paper is to revisit and evaluate this incisive Whewellian criticism of Mill's views by assessing Mill's account of Michael Faraday's discovery of electrical induction. The historical evidence demonstrates that Mill's reconstruction is an inadequate reconstruction of this historical episode and the scientific practices Faraday employed. But a study of Faraday's research also raises some questions about Whewell's characterization of this discovery. Thus, this example provides an opportunity to reconsider the debate between Whewell and Mill concerning the role of the sciences in the development of an adequate philosophy of scientific methodology.
机译：威廉·惠威尔（William Whewell）对约翰·斯图尔特·米尔（John Stuart Mill）的科学哲学提出了一系列异议，这表明米尔的观点没有被科学史或对科学实践的充分反思所恰当地赋予。本文的目的是通过评估密尔对迈克尔·法拉第（Michael Faraday）发现的电感应的描述，来重新审视和评估这种惠氏对密尔观点的尖锐批评。历史证据表明，密尔的重建是对这一历史事件和法拉第所采用的科学实践的充分重建。但是，对法拉第研究的研究也提出了一些有关惠威尔对这一发现的描述的问题。因此，这个例子提供了一个机会，可以重新考虑Whewell和Mill之间关于科学在发展适当的科学方法论哲学中的作用的争论。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
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