The Rise of Logical Empiricist Philosophy of Science and the Fate of Speculative Philosophy of Science

J. Katzav, K. Vaesen
{"title":"The Rise of Logical Empiricist Philosophy of Science and the Fate of Speculative Philosophy of Science","authors":"J. Katzav, K. Vaesen","doi":"10.1086/721135","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article contributes to explaining the rise of logical empiricism in mid-twentieth century (North) America and to a better understanding of American philosophy of science before the dominance of logical empiricism. We show that, contrary to a number of existing histories, philosophy of science was already a distinct subfield of philosophy, one with its own approaches and issues, even before logical empiricists arrived in America. It was a form of speculative philosophy with a concern for speculative metaphysics, normative issues relating to science and society, and issues that later were associated with logical empiricist philosophy of science, issues such as confirmation, scientific explanation, reductionism, and laws of nature. Further, philosophy of science was not primarily pragmatist in orientation. We also show, with the help of our historical characterization, that a recent account of the emergence of analytic philosophy applies to the rise of logical empiricism. It has been argued that the emergence of American analytic philosophy is partly explained by analytic philosophers’ use of key institutions, including journals, to marginalize speculative philosophy and promote analytic philosophy. We argue that this use of institutions included the marginalization of speculative and value-laden philosophy of science and the promotion of logical empiricism.","PeriodicalId":42878,"journal":{"name":"HOPOS-The Journal of the International Society for the History of Philosophy of Science","volume":"1 1","pages":"327 - 358"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"HOPOS-The Journal of the International Society for the History of Philosophy of Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1086/721135","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

This article contributes to explaining the rise of logical empiricism in mid-twentieth century (North) America and to a better understanding of American philosophy of science before the dominance of logical empiricism. We show that, contrary to a number of existing histories, philosophy of science was already a distinct subfield of philosophy, one with its own approaches and issues, even before logical empiricists arrived in America. It was a form of speculative philosophy with a concern for speculative metaphysics, normative issues relating to science and society, and issues that later were associated with logical empiricist philosophy of science, issues such as confirmation, scientific explanation, reductionism, and laws of nature. Further, philosophy of science was not primarily pragmatist in orientation. We also show, with the help of our historical characterization, that a recent account of the emergence of analytic philosophy applies to the rise of logical empiricism. It has been argued that the emergence of American analytic philosophy is partly explained by analytic philosophers’ use of key institutions, including journals, to marginalize speculative philosophy and promote analytic philosophy. We argue that this use of institutions included the marginalization of speculative and value-laden philosophy of science and the promotion of logical empiricism.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
逻辑经验主义科学哲学的兴起与思辨科学哲学的命运
本文有助于解释逻辑经验主义在二十世纪中期(北美)的兴起,并有助于更好地理解逻辑经验主义占主导地位之前的美国科学哲学。我们表明,与许多现存的历史相反,科学哲学甚至在逻辑经验主义者到达美国之前,就已经是哲学的一个独特的分支领域,有自己的方法和问题。它是思辨哲学的一种形式,关注思辨形而上学、与科学和社会有关的规范性问题,以及后来与逻辑经验主义科学哲学有关的问题,如确认、科学解释、还原论和自然法则等问题。此外,科学哲学主要不是实用主义取向。我们也借由历史的描述来说明,分析哲学最近出现的情形,也适用于逻辑经验主义的兴起。有人认为,美国分析哲学的出现部分是由于分析哲学家利用包括期刊在内的关键机构来边缘化思辨哲学并促进分析哲学。我们认为,这种制度的使用包括了对思辨的、充满价值的科学哲学的边缘化,以及对逻辑经验主义的推崇。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
25
期刊最新文献
Conceptual Analysis and the Analytic Method in Kant’s Prize Essay Johann Nikolaus Tetens (1736-1807) and the Idea of Phoneme. A Chapter in the History of Linguistic Thought What Conceptual Engineering Can Learn From The History of Philosophy of Science: Healthy Externalism and Metasemantic Plasticity Sellars, Analyticity, and a Dynamic Picture of Language Special Section Introduction
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1