Advertisement

Towards Metamethodology: For the History and Philosophy of Science

  • John F. Fox
Chapter
  • 95 Downloads
Part of the Australasian Studies in History and Philosophy of Science book series (AUST, volume 12)

Abstract

Much philosophy of science is methodology of science. How should one go about doing and evaluating it? The question is one of the methodology of methodology, i.e. of metamethodology. There is a vague thesis common to Descartes and more recent philosophers such as Quine and Lakatos: that what is good methodology, good evidence, good reason for accepting, rejecting or revising beliefs in mathematics and in the sciences properly so called, does not differ in significant kind from what is good methodology, evidence or reason elsewhere, even in epistemology and ethics; and further, that mathematics and the natural sciences provide good paradigms for methodology generally. Following von Hayek,1 I call this form of epistemological and methodological monism: Scientism.

Keywords

Inductive Logic Dutch Book Scientific Research Programme Good Methodology External Explanation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Agassi, J. (1963) Towards an Historiography of Science, Beiheft 2 to History and Theory. Reprinted by Wesley an University Press, Middletown, 1967.Google Scholar
  2. Clark, P. (1976) ‘Atomism versus Thermodynamics’ in Howson: 41–105.Google Scholar
  3. Dorling, J. (1979) ‘Bayesian Personalism, the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes, and Duhem’s Problem’, Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science10: 117–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Feyerabend, P.K. (1974) Against Method. New Left Books, London.Google Scholar
  5. Feyerabend, P.K. (1978) Science in a Free Society. New Left Books, London; Part One, “Reason and Practice”.Google Scholar
  6. Forder, H.G. (1927) The Foundations of Euclidean Geometry. Dover, New York, 1958.Google Scholar
  7. Forster, M. (1988) ‘Unification, Explanation and the Composition of Causes in Newtonian Mechanics’, Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science 19: 55–101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Fox, J. (1981) ‘Appraising Lakatos’, Australasian Journal of Philosophy 51: 92–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Franklin, A. and Howson, C. (1984) ‘Why do Scientists Prefer to Vary their Experiments?’, Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science 15: 51–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Goodman, N. (1955) Fact, Fiction and Forecast. Harvard University Press, Cambridge Mass.Google Scholar
  11. Grünbaum, A. (1976a) ‘Is Falsifiability the Touchstone of Scientific Rationality?’ in Cohen, Feyerabend & Wartofsky (eds.), Essays in Memory of Imre Lakatos: 213–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Grünbaum, A. (1976b) ‘Is the Method of Bold Conjectures and Attempted Refutations Justifiably the Method of Science?’, British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 27: 105–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Grünbaum, A. (1976c) ‘Ad Hoc Auxiliary Hypotheses and Falsificationism’, British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 27: 329–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Howson, C. (ed.) (1976) Method and Appraisal in the Physical Sciences. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  15. Jeffrey, R.C. (1975) ‘Probability and Falsification: A Critique of the Popper Programme’, Synthese 30: 95–117; and ‘Replies’, ibid.: 149–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Koertge, N. (1976) ‘Rational Reconstructions’ in Cohen, R., Feyerabend, P.K. and Wartofsky, M. (eds.), Essays in Memory of Imre Lakatos: 359–369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lakatos, I. (1971) ‘History of Science and its Rational Reconstructions’ in Buck R.C. and Cohen, R.S. (eds.), Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science 8, Reidel, Dordrecht: 91–135. Reprinted in Howson: 1–39 and in Lakatos (1978), Vol I: 102–38.Google Scholar
  18. Lakatos, I. (1976) Proof and Refutations, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 1976; Reprinted from (1963–4) ‘Proofs and Refutations’, British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 14–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lakatos, I. (1978) Philosophical Papers, 2 Vols, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Lakatos, I. and Zahar, E. (1976) ‘Why Did Copernicus’ Programme Supersede Ptolemy’s?’ in Westman, R. (ed.) The Copernican Achievement: 354–383. Reprinted as ch. 5 of Lakatos (1978) Vol. 1.Google Scholar
  21. Quine, W. (1969) ‘Epistemology Naturalized’ in his Ontological Relativity and Other Essays. Columbia University Press, New York.Google Scholar
  22. Rosencrantz, R. (1977) Inference, Method and Decision. Reidel, Dordrecht; ch. 6, ‘Bayes and Popper’.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Smart, J.J.C. (1972) ‘Science, History and Methodology’, British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 23: 266–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Thomason, N. (1994) ‘The Power of ARCHED Hypotheses: Feyerabend’s Galileo as a Closet Rationalist’, British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 35: 255–264CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Urbach, P. (1989) ‘The Bayesian Alternative to the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes’ in Gavroglou, K., Goudaroulis, Y. and Nicolacopoulos, P. (eds.), Imre Lakatos and Theories of Scientific Change. Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science 111. Klu-wer, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  26. von Hayek, F. (1955) ‘Scientism and the Study of Society’ in The Counter-Revolution of Science. Free Press, Glencoe, 111.Google Scholar
  27. Whewell, W. (1847) Philosophy of the Inductive Sciences, 2 vols., 2nd edn; Reprinted by Johnson Reprint Corp, New York, 1967.Google Scholar
  28. Worrall, J. (1976) ‘Thomas Young and the “Refutation” of Newtonian Optics’ in Howson: 102–179.Google Scholar
  29. Zahar, E. (1973) ‘Why Did Einstein’s Research Programme Supersede Lorentz’s?’, British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 28: 195–213. Reprinted in Howson: 211–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • John F. Fox
    • 1
  1. 1.La Trobe UniversityBundooraAustralia

Personalised recommendations