Abstract
I defend against criticism the following claims concerning Thomas Kuhn: (i) there is a strong naturalist streak in The structure of scientific revolutions, whereby Kuhn used the results of a posteriori
enquiry in addressing philosophical questions; (ii) as Kuhn’s career as
a philosopher of science developed he tended to drop the naturalistic
elements and to replace them with more traditionally philosophical, a priori
approaches; (iii) at the same time there is a significant residue of
positivist thought in Kuhn, which Kuhn did not recognise as such; (iv)
the naturalistic elements referred to in (i) are the most original and
fruitful elements of Kuhn’s thinking; (v) the positivistic elements
referred to in (iii) vitiated his thought and acted as factors in
preventing Kuhn from developing the naturalistic elements and from
following the path taken by much subsequent philosophy of science.
Preston presents an alternative reading of Kuhn which emphasizes the
Wittgensteinian elements in Kuhn. I argue that this alternative view is,
descriptively, poorly supported by the textual evidence and the facts
of the history of philosophy of science in the twentieth century. I
provide some defence of the naturalistic approach and related themes.
| Translated title of the contribution | Kuhn, Naturalism, and the Positivist Legacy |
|---|---|
| Original language | English |
| Pages (from-to) | 337-356 |
| Number of pages | 20 |
| Journal | Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A |
| Volume | 35 |
| Issue number | 2 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 2004 |
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Kuhn, Naturalism, and the Positivist Legacy'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver