科学哲学 azw3 chm 地址 kindle 阿里云 下载 umd pdf

暂无相关简介，正在全力查找中！

暂无相关目录，正在全力查找中！

暂无相关内容，正在全力查找中

暂无出版社相关信息，正在全力查找中！

暂无相关书籍摘录，正在全力查找中！

在线阅读地址：科学哲学在线阅读

在线听书地址：科学哲学在线收听

在线购买地址：科学哲学在线购买

In recent years, some natural and social scientists, along with some historians, sociologists, and even some philosophers, have rejected both the claim that the methods of science are open to assessment from the standpoint of philosophy, and the notion that philosophy might dictate to any other discipline, how it should proceed, in explanation or any other activity.

As the number of possible interfering factors to be held constant grows, the testability of laws is reduced, and makes it too easy for anyone to claim to have uncovered a scientific law.

Gödel’s proof has two implications. First, it probably did more than anything else to undermine the logical positivists’ confidence in their own account of science as purely empirical and experimental...Gödel’s proof showed that this ambition was unattainable. By showing that no axiomatic system strong enough to derive even the truths of arithmetic could be both consistent and complete, he demonstrated that the logical positivist account of mathematics as analytic truths had to be mistaken. Thus, like empiricists before their time, the logical positivists had either to find a new account of how, in mathematics, we can have knowledge of necessary truths or else give up their empiricist epistemology. The increasing realization of this problem was one of the most powerful reasons that philoso...

暂无其它内容！