Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T00:24:52.514Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Science as Will and Representation: Carnap, Reichenbach, and the Sociology of Science

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2022

Alan W. Richardson
Alan W. Richardson*
Affiliation:
University of British Columbia
*
†Send requests for reprints to the author, Department of Philosophy, 1866 Main Mall–E370, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z1, Canada.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This essay explores some of the issues raised as regards the relations of philosophy and sociology of science in the work of Rudolf Carnap and Hans Reichenbach. It argues that Hans Reichenbach's distinction between the contexts of discovery and justification should not be seen as erecting a principled normative/descriptive distinction that demarcates philosophy of science from sociology of science. The essay also raises certain issues about the role of volition, decision, and the limits of epistemological concern in the work of Carnap and Reichenbach and in some recent sociology of science. The relations of philosophy of science to sociology of science are seen to be more deeply rooted and more interesting than the Science Warriors would have us believe.

Type
Metaphilosophy and the History of the Philosophy of Science
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 67 , Issue S3: Supplement. Proceedings of the 1998 Biennial Meetings of the Philosophy of Science Association. Part II: Symposia Papers Sep., 2000 , 2000 , pp. S151 - S162
Copyright
Copyright © 2000 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.)

Footnotes

‡

A previous version of this essay was read in a symposium on logical empiricism and sociology of science at the Philosophy of Science Association Meeting in Kansas City. I am grateful to my co-symposiasts, Thomas Uebel and Elisabeth Nemeth, the session chair, Richard Creath, and the audience, especially Robert S. Cohen, Michael Friedman, Don Howard, Paul Roth, and Friedrich Stadler, for helpful comments and suggestions. Thanks also to Stephen Straker, Ernie Hamm, and Judy Segal for discussions of the topic of this essay and of the nature of Science Studies generally.

References

Bacon, Francis ([1605] 1955), “The Advancement of Learning” in Dick, H. G. (ed.), Selected Writings of Francis Bacon. New York: Random House, 157–392.Google Scholar
Bloor, David (1991), Knowledge and Social Imagery, 2nd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Carnap, Rudolf (1922), Der Raum. Berlin: Reuther und Reichard.Google Scholar
Carnap, Rudolf. (1923), “Über die Aufgabe der Physik”, Kant-Studien 28: 90–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carnap, Rudolf. ([1932] 1987), “On Protocol Sentences”, Noûs 21: 457–470.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carnap, Rudolf. (1936/7), “Testability and Meaning”, Philosophy of Science 3: 419–471; 4: 1–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carnap, Rudolf. (1956), “Empiricism, Semantics, and Ontology”, in Meaning and Necessity, 2nd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 205–221.Google Scholar
Collins, Harry M. (1992), Changing Order: Replication and Induction in Scientific Practice, 2nd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Collins, Harry M. and Pinch, Trevor (1993), The Golem: Everything You Need to Know about Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Giere, Ronald N. (1988), Explaining Science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giere, Ronald N. (1995), “Viewing Science”, in David Hull, Mickey Forbes, and Richard M. Burian (eds.), PSA 1994, vol. 2, East Lansing, MI: Philosophy of Science Association, 3–16.Google Scholar
Hacking, Ian (1983), Representing and Intervening. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neurath, Otto ([1913] 1983), “The Lost Wanderers of Descartes and the Auxiliary Motive”, in Cohen, Robert S. and Neurath, Maria (eds.), Otto Neurath: Philosophical Papers 1913–1946. Dordrecht: Reidel, 1–12.Google Scholar
Reichenbach, Hans (1938), Experience and Prediction. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Uebel, Thomas E. (this volume), “Logical Empiricism and the Sociology of Knowledge: The Case of Neurath and Frank”.Google Scholar