Friday, January 18, 2013


One reason why scientists in general, including geomorphologists, philosophy viewed
with a jaundiced eye is that the traditional philosophy of science, particularly logical
Empiricism was highly normative or prescriptive in nature, a characteristic of many
Scientists find annoying. Nobody likes it tells how they do their work better by someone
anyone who has not actually performed the tasks involved. This problem has been accentuated by
the analytical type of logical empiricism holds that that the knowledge of the provision of
Basis for epistemic norms in science can a priori (ie, not be comprehended by empirical
Reflection on the meaning of certain phrases). In other words, the philosophical
Program to understand the science is independent of specific scientific findings, beliefs, or
The empirical basis of logical positivism clearly contrary to the empirical
modus operandi of scientists. Contemporary philosophers of science recognize fully the
need to struggle with this problem, and in the last 30 years (ie since the end of the
logical empiricism) have concentrated their efforts on the development of philosophical naturalized
Perspectives that capture the knowledge-producing potential of science as it try
actually practicing.

No comments:

Post a Comment