Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-rkxrd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-24T21:25:19.306Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

From Methodology to Dialectics: A post-Cartesian Approach to Scientific Rationality

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 February 2022

Marcello Pera
Marcello Pera*
Affiliation:
University of Pisa
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The problem of scientific rationality is one of the most controversial in the contemporary philosophy of science. If I am so foolhardy as to raise it again, it is because I do not feel comfortable with most present-day solutions and because I hope I may suggest a more promising, although still tentative, line of research.

In order to illustrate the particular angle from which I intend to deal with this problem, I shall make use of the words of a great cosmologist, Fred Hoyle, and I shall also refer to the current debate in cosmology. What I have to say, however, is intended to apply to science in general and not only to a single discipline or to a specific episode.

Type
Part X. Methodology
Information
PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association , Volume 1986 , Issue 2: Volume Two: Symposia and Invited Papers 1986 , 1986 , pp. 359 - 374
Copyright
Copyright © 1987 by 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

Bacon, (1860) Novum Organon. In The Works of Francis Bacon. Edited by J. Spedding, R. L. Ellis, D. D. Heath. London: Longman and Co. Vol. IV.Google Scholar
Bondi, (1960) The Universe at Large. London: Heinemann Educational Books.Google Scholar
Bondi, (1968) Cosmology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Second Edition.Google Scholar
Bondi, (1980) “Steady-State Origins: Comments I.” In Terzian, Y. and Bilson, E. M. (eds.). 1982. Pages 58-61.Google Scholar
Bondi, H, Bonnor, B. Lyttleton, A., Whitrow, G.J. (1960) Rival Cosmological Theories. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bondi, H and Gold, T. (1948) “The Steady-State Theory of the Expanding Universe.” Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 108: 252-270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonnor, W. (1964) The Mystery of the Expanding Universe. New York: Mcmillan. Burbidge, G. (1971). “Was there really a Big Bang?” Nature 233: 36-40.Google Scholar
Feyerabend, P. (1975) Against Method. London: New Left Books.Google Scholar
Feyerabend, P. (1981) “Consolations for the Specialists.” In Philosophical Papers, 2 Vols. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Vol.1. Pages 131-161.Google Scholar
Hoyle, F. (1948) “A New Model for the Expanding Universe.” Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society 108: 372ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoyle, F. (1965) Galaxies, Nuclei, and Quasars. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
Hoyle, F. (1982) “Steady State Cosmology Revisited.” In Terzian, Y. and Bilson, E. M. (eds.). 1982. Pp. 17-57.Google Scholar
John, W. (ed.). (1973) Cosmology now. London: BBC.Google Scholar
Lakatos, I. (1978) “Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes.” In Philosophical Papers, 2 Vols. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Vol. 1. Pages 8-101.Google Scholar
Laudan, W. (1977) Progress and its Problems. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Laudan, W. (1984) Science and Values. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
McMullin, E. (1979) “The Ambiguity of Historicism.” In Current Research in Philosophy of Science. Edited by Asquith, P. D. and Kyburg, H. Jr. East Lansing, Michigan: Philosophy of Science Association. Pages 55-83.Google Scholar
Narlikar, J. (1973) “Steady State Defended.” In John, L. (ed.). 1973. Pages 69-84.Google Scholar
Narlikar, J. (1977) The Structure of the Universe. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Peebles, P. J. (1971) Physical Cosmology. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Pera, M. (1981) “Scienza e trascendenza.” Studium 77, 5: 517-34.Google Scholar
Pera, M. (1985) “Narcissus at the Pool: Scientific Method and the History of Science.” Organon, forthcoming.Google Scholar
Pera, M. (1986a) “Methodological Sophisticationism: A Degenerating Programme.” Paper read at the Lakatos Memorial Conference on “Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge: 20 Years After,” Thessaloniki, 18-22 August 1986; forthcoming in the Proceedings.Google Scholar
Pera, M. (1986b) “Breaking the Link between Methodology and Rationality: A Plea for Rhetoric in Scientific Inquiry.” Paper read at the 6th Joint Meeting of the IUHPS, Ghent, 25-30 August 1986; forthcoming in the Proceedings.Google Scholar
Perelman, C. (1970) Le champ de Vargumentation. Bruxelles: Presses Universitäres de Bruxelles.Google Scholar
Perelman, C. (1971) “Droit, Philosophie et argumentation.” Handelingen van de voor Wijsbegeerte des Rechtes LV: 3-21.Google Scholar
Perelman, C. and Olbrechts-Tyteca, L. (1969) The New Rhetoric: A Treatise on Argumentation. Trans. Wilkinson, J. and Weaver, P.. Notre Dame: Notre Dame University Press.Google Scholar
Popper, G. (1959) The Logic of Scientific Discovery. London: Hutchinson.Google Scholar
Rescher, N. (1977) Dialectics. New York: University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Sciama, D. (1971) Modern Cosmology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sciama, D. (1973) “Cosmological Models.” In John, L. (ed.). 1973. Pp. 55-68.Google Scholar
Terzian, Y. and Bilson, E. M. (eds.). (1982) Cosmology and Astrophysics. Ithaca: Ithaca University Press.Google Scholar
Watkins, J. (1978) “The Popperian Approach to Scientific Knowledge.” In Progress and Rationality in Science. Edited by Radnitzky, G. and Andersson, G.. Dordrecht: Reidel. Pp. 23-43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watkins, J. (1984) Science and Scepticism. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weinberg, S. (1972) Gravitation and Cosmology. New York: J. Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar
Weinberg, S. (1977) The First Three Minutes. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Wellman, C. (1971) Challenge and Response. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.Google Scholar