Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-gs9qr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-31T03:14:28.846Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Rationality of Scientific Discovery Part II: An Aim Oriented Theory of Scientific Discovery

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 March 2022

Nicholas Maxwell
Nicholas Maxwell*
Affiliation:
University of London
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In Part I (Philosophy of Science, Vol. 41 No. 2, June, 1974) it was argued that in order to rebut Humean sceptical arguments, and thus show that it is possible for pure science to be rational, we need to reject standard empiricism and adopt in its stead aim oriented empiricism. Part II seeks to articulate in more detail a theory of rational scientific discovery within the general framework of aim oriented empiricism. It is argued that this theory (a) exhibits pure science as a rational enterprise (b) enables us to resolve problems associated with the key notions of simplicity and intelligibility (c) has important implications both for philosophy of science and for scientific practice itself.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 41 , Issue 3 , September 1974 , pp. 247 - 295
Copyright
Copyright © 1974 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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES*

[1] Chiu, H. and Hoffmann, W. F. Gravitation and Relativity. New York: W. A. Benjamin, 1964.Google Scholar
[2] Einstein, A. Ideas and Opinions. London: Alvin Redman, 1954.Google Scholar
[3] Einstein, A. “Autobiographical Notes” and “Reply to Criticisms.” in Albert Einstein: Philosopher-Scientist. Edited by Schilpp, P. LaSalle, Illinois: Open Court, 1969.Google Scholar
[4] Emmerson, J. Symmetry Principles in Particle Physics. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1972.Google Scholar
[5] Goodman, N. Problems and Projects. New York: Bobbs-Merrill Co., 1972.Google Scholar
[6] Hoffmann, B. Albert Einstein: Creator and Rebel. London: Hart-Davis, MacGibbon, 1973.Google Scholar
[7] Kuhn, T. S. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1970.Google Scholar
[8] Lakatos, I. “Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes.” in Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge. Edited by Lakatos, I. and Musgrave, A. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1970.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[9] Maxwell, N. “Can there be Necessary Connections between Successive Events?” British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 19 (1968): 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[10] Maxwell, N. “A New Look at the Quantum Mechanical Problem of Measurement.” American Journal of Physics 40 (1972).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[11] Maxwell, N. “The Problem of Measurement—Real or Imaginary?” American Journal of Physics 41 (1973).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[12] Maxwell, N. “Towards a Micro-Realistic Version of Quantum Mechanics.” Foundations of Physics. (forthcoming)Google Scholar
[13] Penrose, R. and MacCallum, M. “Twistor Theory: An Approach to the Quantisation of Fields and Space-Time.” Physics Reports 6C (No. 4) (1973).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[14] Popper, K. R. The Logic of Scientific Discovery. London: Hutchinson, 1959.Google Scholar
[15] Riemann, G. “On the Hypotheses which Lie at the Foundations of Geometry.” in A Source Book in Mathematics. Edited by Smith, D. E. New York and London: McGraw-Hill, 1929.Google Scholar
[16] Swinburne, R. G. (ed.). The Justification of Induction. London: Oxford University Press, 1973.Google Scholar
[17] Wheeler, J. A. Geometrodynamics. London: Academic Press, 1972.Google Scholar
[18] Wheeler, J. A. “Superspace and the Nature of Quantum Geometrodynamics.” in Battelle Rencontre. Edited by DeWitt, C. M. and Wheeler, J. A. New York: W. A. Benjamin, 1968.Google Scholar
[19] Wigner, E. P. Symmetries and Reflections. London: The M.I.T. Press, 1970.Google Scholar