The essential problem of empiricism

Philosophy of Science 10 (1):13-17 (1943)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Every natural scientist, I should suppose, is an empiricist. But to say this is not to assert that he is consciously such. Very few scientists would presumably consider themselves qualified to state even what is involved in the term, and still fewer would be willing to admit that they are adherents of the position. One might say that natural scientists, in their general outlook, presuppose—in one of the many meanings of this term—the empirical point of view. This probably means that if one could make clear to them what is meant by the term, and if one could convince them that it is proper for scientists to take sides on philosophical issues, they should probably be willing to call themselves empiricists. Expressed otherwise, the general temper and spirit of natural science are those which philosophers tend to identify with the empirical outlook.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 103,314

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

What Could A Feminist Science Be?Barry R. Gross - 1994 - The Monist 77 (4):434-444.
Russell on Universals.J. O. Urmson - 1986 - Royal Institute of Philosophy Lecture Series 20:245-258.
Russell on Universals.J. O. Urmson - 1986 - Royal Institute of Philosophy Lecture Series 20:245-258.
Yalcin on 'Might'.D. Barnett - 2009 - Mind 118 (471):771-775.
A Comment on Polanyi and Kuhn.Maben Walter Poirier - 1989 - The Thomist 53 (2):259-279.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
301 (#95,254)

6 months
12 (#218,371)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references