On the concept of systematization in the Kemeny-Oppenheim approach to intertheoretical reduction

IF 1.4 2区 哲学 Q1 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE
Gerhard Wagner
{"title":"On the concept of systematization in the Kemeny-Oppenheim approach to intertheoretical reduction","authors":"Gerhard Wagner","doi":"10.1016/j.shpsa.2023.10.005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>In 1956, John G. Kemeny and Paul Oppenheim proposed an approach to intertheoretical reduction as an alternative to that of Ernest Nagel. However, they neglected to provide a clear definition of its basic concept of systematization. After decades of languishing in the shadows, new interest in the KO approach is emerging. Nevertheless, there are still misunderstandings regarding this basic concept. The present paper elucidates this concept by returning to Oppenheim's hitherto little-noticed publications from the 1920s and 1930s, which Kemeny and Oppenheim obviously used as guidance in 1956. Reappraising Oppenheim's early writings delivers two significant payoffs: new clarity in understanding the concept of systematization as well as a more solid grasp of the structure of this approach as a distinctive combination of explanation and systematization.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":49467,"journal":{"name":"Studies in History and Philosophy of Science","volume":"103 ","pages":"Pages 29-38"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studies in History and Philosophy of Science","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0039368123001437","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In 1956, John G. Kemeny and Paul Oppenheim proposed an approach to intertheoretical reduction as an alternative to that of Ernest Nagel. However, they neglected to provide a clear definition of its basic concept of systematization. After decades of languishing in the shadows, new interest in the KO approach is emerging. Nevertheless, there are still misunderstandings regarding this basic concept. The present paper elucidates this concept by returning to Oppenheim's hitherto little-noticed publications from the 1920s and 1930s, which Kemeny and Oppenheim obviously used as guidance in 1956. Reappraising Oppenheim's early writings delivers two significant payoffs: new clarity in understanding the concept of systematization as well as a more solid grasp of the structure of this approach as a distinctive combination of explanation and systematization.

论凯美尼-奥本海姆理论间还原方法中的系统化概念。
1956年,约翰·凯梅尼和保罗·奥本海姆提出了一种理论间还原方法,作为欧内斯特·内格尔方法的替代方案。然而,他们忽略了为其系统化的基本概念提供一个明确的定义。在经历了几十年的阴影之后,对KO方法的新兴趣正在出现。然而,对这一基本概念仍然存在误解。本文通过回到奥本海姆在20世纪20年代和30年代迄今为止鲜为人知的出版物来阐明这一概念,凯梅尼和奥本海姆显然在1956年将其作为指导。重新评价奥本海姆的早期著作提供了两个重要的回报:理解系统化概念的新清晰度,以及作为解释和系统化的独特组合的这种方法的结构的更坚实的把握。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
Studies in History and Philosophy of Science
Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 管理科学-科学史与科学哲学
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
10.00%
发文量
166
审稿时长
6.6 weeks
期刊介绍: Studies in History and Philosophy of Science is devoted to the integrated study of the history, philosophy and sociology of the sciences. The editors encourage contributions both in the long-established areas of the history of the sciences and the philosophy of the sciences and in the topical areas of historiography of the sciences, the sciences in relation to gender, culture and society and the sciences in relation to arts. The Journal is international in scope and content and publishes papers from a wide range of countries and cultural traditions.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信