Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Misunderstanding Empiricism
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 80 of 185 (431711)
11-01-2007 5:22 PM
Reply to: Message 65 by Percy
10-31-2007 9:08 PM


Re: Science and Empiricism
I don't see this as an issue worth much discussion time, though. We both view science as tentative, and if you prefer to see the origins of tentativity in empiricism, go ahead.
There was a scientist who turned into a philosopher. He was called Charles Sanders Pierce. He basically founded the philosophy of pragmatism, which includes fallibilism. Pragmatism was an offshoot of empiricism. This is as far back as I can go into the idea of the tentative nature of knowledge, but I thought you might be interested.
Rather, we say science is empirical and tentative, separate concepts.
I would agree with that. Science is a methodology that comes from various ideas about how to seek truth. Empiricism, rationalism, positivism, fallibilism, verificationism, falsifiabilism (Popperism?). Science brings together a wide range of ideas from various fronts and attempts to do something with them. If we develop a theory using scientific methodology we have to now how we should treat the theory - do we go with scientific realism or should we go with instrumentalism? Fascinating stuff if you really want to dig deep, but most people get by without worrying about it

This message is a reply to:
 Message 65 by Percy, posted 10-31-2007 9:08 PM Percy has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024