Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-jbqgn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-21T16:02:15.795Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Review of Nancy Cartwright’s A Philosopher Looks at Science - Nancy Cartwright, A Philosopher Looks at Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press (2022), 210 pp. $12.95 (paperback).

Review products

Nancy Cartwright, A Philosopher Looks at Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press (2022), 210 pp. $12.95 (paperback).

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 April 2023

Daniel J. Hicks Open the ORCID record for Daniel J. Hicks [Opens in a new window]
Daniel J. Hicks*
Affiliation:
University of California, Merced, CA, USA
*
Email: hicks.daniel.j@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Book Review
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 90 , Issue 3 , July 2023 , pp. 756 - 760
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the Philosophy of Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Cambridge University Press. n.d. “A Philosopher Looks At.” Accessed May 30, 2023. https://www.cambridge.org/core/series/philosopher-looks-at/486917117D646903AC3A35E66F5974E5.Google Scholar
Cartwright, Nancy. 1983. How the Laws of Physics Lie. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cartwright, Nancy. 1997. “Where Do Laws of Nature Come From?” Dialectica 51 (1):65–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cartwright, Nancy. 1999. A Dappled World: A Study of the Boundaries of Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feest, Uljana. 2019. “Why Replication Is Overrated.” Philosophy of Science 86 (5):895–905.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leonelli, Sabina. 2018. “Rethinking Reproducibility as a Criterion for Research Quality.” In Research in the History of Economic Thought and Methodology, edited by Fiorito, Luca, Scheall, Scott, and Suprinyak, Carlos Eduardo, 36:129–46. Bingley, UK: Emerald.Google Scholar
Muthukrishna, Michael, and Henrich, Joseph. 2019. “A Problem in Theory.” Nature Human Behaviour, February 1. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-018-0522-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wagenmakers, Eric-Jan, Ruud Wetzels, Denny Borsboom, van der Maas, Han L. J., and Kievit, Rogier A.. 2012. “An Agenda for Purely Confirmatory Research.” Perspectives on Psychological Science 7 (6):632–38.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed