Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Science's rationality and progress do not conform to the ... — Carmelics
    Home/Skepticism
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Supports→The rationality and progress of science must be explained by studying historical patterns of scientific practice rather than by appeal to standard (e.g., purely logical or algorithmic) norms

    Science's rationality and progress do not conform to the standard account of scientific rationality

    SkepticismTruth & Knowledge
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Topics

    SkepticismTruth & Knowledge

    Related

    Kuhn employs a transcendental argument strategy: given that science is rational ...Science as historically practiced is largely rational and progressiveThe rationality and progress of science must be explained by studying historical...

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Skepticism
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    The study of historical patterns of scientific practice reveals those conditions

    Similar

    The rationality and progress of science must be explained by studying ...83%Making rationality derivative to progress confuses rationality's const...81%It does not make sense to speak of a universal standard of rationality...80%The transition from one paradigm to the next cannot be a matter of sci...78%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: rationality-historicist
    View source passageHide passage
    There also seems to be a kind of transcendental argument strategy behind Kuhn’s approach, as a response to the quasi-Kantian question: Given that science, as historically practiced, is largely rational and progressive, but not in the standard way, how are its rationality and progress possible? Supposedly, the study of the historical patterns will show the way.

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective