理论与模型

IF 3.2 1区 哲学 Q1 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE
M. Vorms
{"title":"理论与模型","authors":"M. Vorms","doi":"10.1093/OSO/9780190690649.003.0005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Theories are among the main achievements of scientific inquiry and appear as the repositories of scientific knowledge. This chapter is devoted to an examination of the notion of theory as a unit of analysis for the study of scientific knowledge. Most of the analysis consists in presenting and criticizing two major proposals made by philosophers of science, the “received view,” commonly attributed to logical empiricism, and the “semantic view of theories,” which became the new orthodoxy in the 1960s. Both proposals aim at formal reconstructions of theories. The shared assumptions underlying this common project will be questioned. Alternative ways of construing scientific theorizing will be sketched, notably those which are more “agent-centered” and put forward the way scientists use and understand their theories in practice.","PeriodicalId":55327,"journal":{"name":"British Journal for the Philosophy of Science","volume":"141 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2018-07-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Theories and Models\",\"authors\":\"M. Vorms\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/OSO/9780190690649.003.0005\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Theories are among the main achievements of scientific inquiry and appear as the repositories of scientific knowledge. This chapter is devoted to an examination of the notion of theory as a unit of analysis for the study of scientific knowledge. Most of the analysis consists in presenting and criticizing two major proposals made by philosophers of science, the “received view,” commonly attributed to logical empiricism, and the “semantic view of theories,” which became the new orthodoxy in the 1960s. Both proposals aim at formal reconstructions of theories. The shared assumptions underlying this common project will be questioned. Alternative ways of construing scientific theorizing will be sketched, notably those which are more “agent-centered” and put forward the way scientists use and understand their theories in practice.\",\"PeriodicalId\":55327,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"British Journal for the Philosophy of Science\",\"volume\":\"141 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-07-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"British Journal for the Philosophy of Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/OSO/9780190690649.003.0005\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal for the Philosophy of Science","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/OSO/9780190690649.003.0005","RegionNum":1,"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

摘要

理论是科学探索的主要成果之一,是科学知识的宝库。这一章专门考查理论的概念,作为科学知识研究的分析单位。大部分的分析包括提出和批评科学哲学家提出的两个主要建议,一个是“公认观点”,通常归因于逻辑经验主义,另一个是“理论的语义观点”,这在20世纪60年代成为新的正统观点。这两种建议都旨在对理论进行形式重建。这一共同项目背后的共同假设将受到质疑。将概述构建科学理论的替代方法,特别是那些更加“以主体为中心”的方法,并提出科学家在实践中使用和理解其理论的方式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Theories and Models
Theories are among the main achievements of scientific inquiry and appear as the repositories of scientific knowledge. This chapter is devoted to an examination of the notion of theory as a unit of analysis for the study of scientific knowledge. Most of the analysis consists in presenting and criticizing two major proposals made by philosophers of science, the “received view,” commonly attributed to logical empiricism, and the “semantic view of theories,” which became the new orthodoxy in the 1960s. Both proposals aim at formal reconstructions of theories. The shared assumptions underlying this common project will be questioned. Alternative ways of construing scientific theorizing will be sketched, notably those which are more “agent-centered” and put forward the way scientists use and understand their theories in practice.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
British Journal for the Philosophy of Science
British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 管理科学-科学史与科学哲学
CiteScore
6.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
50
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science encourages the application of philosophical techniques to issues raised by the natural and human sciences. These include general questions of scientific knowledge and objectivity, as well as more particular problems arising within specific disciplines. Topics currently being discussed in the journal include: causation, the logic of natural selection, the interpretation of quantum mechanics, the direction of time, probability, confirmation, foundations of mathematics, supertasks and the theory of emotion.
×
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