Inconsistency in Science

  • Joke Meheus

Part of the Origins book series (ORIN, volume 2)

Table of contents

  1. Front Matter
    Pages i-ix
  2. Jean Paul van Bendegem
    Pages 43-57
  3. Otávio Bueno
    Pages 59-79
  4. Bryson Brown
    Pages 81-103
  5. Newton da Costa, Steven French
    Pages 105-118
  6. Graham Priest
    Pages 119-128
  7. Erik Weber, Kristof de Clercq
    Pages 165-184
  8. John D. Norton
    Pages 185-195
  9. Back Matter
    Pages 213-223

About this book

Introduction

For centuries, inconsistencies were seen as a hindrance to good reasoning, and their role in the sciences was ignored. In recent years, however, logicians as well as philosophers and historians have showed a growing interest in the matter. Central to this change were the advent of paraconsistent logics, the shift in attention from finished theories to construction processes, and the recognition that most scientific theories were at some point either internally inconsistent or incompatible with other accepted findings. The new interest gave rise to important questions. How is `logical anarchy' avoided? Is it ever rational to accept an inconsistent theory? In what sense, if any, can inconsistent theories be considered as true?
The present collection of papers is the first to deal with this kind of questions. It contains case studies as well as philosophical analyses, and presents an excellent overview of the different approaches in the domain.

Keywords

Case Studies Jean-Christophe De Clercq Nicolaus Copernicus concept construction french history history of literature logic mathematics modeling present reason truth

Editors and affiliations

  • Joke Meheus
    • 1
  1. 1.Ghent UniversityGhentBelgium

Bibliographic information

  • DOI https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-0085-6
  • Copyright Information Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2002
  • Publisher Name Springer, Dordrecht
  • eBook Packages Springer Book Archive
  • Print ISBN 978-90-481-6023-5
  • Online ISBN 978-94-017-0085-6
  • About this book