Titlebook: Rethinking Scientific Change and Theory Comparison:; Stabilities, Rupture Léna Soler,Howard Sankey,Paul Hoyningen-Huene Book 2008 Springer

EVICT

Demulcent

Commentary on Bird’s Paperd the Neo-Kantian view of Kuhn regarding world change (p. 36). In this commentary, I would like to pursue this line because it appears to be fruitful. Let me begin by first pinning down the contrast that is at issue.

Licentious

Nonsense and Paradigm Changeg of Wittgenstein’s undertaking. From this side, the paper attempts showing that Wittgenstein’s early philosophy in the . can be understood as a major (perhaps the most) radical “paradigm shift” for the whole “disciplinary matrix” of philosophy. This paradigm change in philosophy is of a very partic

Inelasticity

危險

An Instrumental Bayesianism Meets the History of Scienceity of approaches and fluidity characteristic of theoretical work in real, living fields of scientific inquiry. It functions as a limited, post hoc formalism, and thus should be considered as one tool applicable for describing “normal science”. It should be noted that, in this discussion, while I en

ferment

Commentary on “is Science Cumulative? a Physicist Viewpoint”, by Bernard d’Espagnatis that Kuhn’s thesis of noncumulativity pertains only to . scientific change. Only scientific revolutions bring about the radical changes in the cognitive fabric of scientific theories that give rise to non-cumulativity. By contrast, normal science is fully cumulative. Normal science is likened by

irritation

Some Optimism for the Pessimistferential continuity of apparently referentially stable theoretical terms such as “electron”, in the face of significant change in our favoured scientific theories..The PMI is one of the most potent weapons in the intellectual arsenal of opponents of scientific realism (Stanford, 2003). Scientific r

Badger

Harré Needs No Realismthe year but I don’t remember the issue of laws of nature coming up again – instead we talked a lot about the differences between model-theoretic and scientific models. I learnt a lot from those discussions (as from discussions with others at Oxford), but what was even more memorable and long-lastin

生命

BROW

Book 2008t the international colloquium, “Repenser l’évaluation comparative des théories scientifiques: stabilités, ruptures, incommensurabilités?” organized by Léna Soler and Paul Hoyningen-Huene at the University of Nancy, France, in June 2004. Each paper is followed by a critical comment, which either rep