Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-hfldf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-08T13:37:56.963Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Normative Propositions and the Ideal of an Integrated and Closed System

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 March 2022

W. H. Werkmeister*
Affiliation:
University of Nebraska

Extract

In a paper recently published in this quarterly I argued that modern quantum physics, as an integrated system of laws, supplements and completes in purely quantitative terms the fragmentary order of first-person experience, removing in a unique way ambiguities otherwise encountered at the level of common-sense things; and I contended that the choice of a different selective operator—purpose or value, let us say, rather than quantity—might entail an entirely different range and system of order. It is now my intention to follow up this contention and to indicate at least in outline form some of the implications and possibilities of such a program; for it is possible that this undertaking may bring into new perspective some of the crucial problems which have vexed philosophers at all times when they have dealt with normative propositions and moral judgments.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Philosophy of Science Association 1951

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

1 “An Epistemological Basis of Quantum Physics,” Philosophy of Science, October 1949.

2 The Basis and Structure of Knowledge, 210–221, 343–419. See also: “Science, Its Concepts and Laws,” Journal of Philosophy, July 1949.

3 That in view of Gödel's proof the ideal of an absolutely closed system is not realizable must be admitted; but that the idea of such a system remains the ideal of scientific theory-construction must, I believe, also be conceded. The histories of mathematics and physics provide undeniable evidence of the trend.