Abstract
Hoyningen-Huene (Systematicity: the nature of science, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2013) develops an account of what science is, distinguishing it from common sense. According to Hoyningen-Huene, the key distinguishing feature is that science is more systematic. He identifies nine ways in which science is more systematic than common sense. I compare Hoyningen-Huene’s view to a view I refer to as the “Continuity Thesis.” The Continuity Thesis states that scientific knowledge is just an extension of common sense. This thesis is associated with Quine, Planck, and others. I argue that Hoyningen-Huene ultimately rejects the Continuity Thesis, and I present further evidence to show that the Continuity Thesis is false. I also argue that it is the systematicity of science that ultimately grounds the epistemic authority of science. Hoyningen-Huene thus draws attention to an important feature of science that explains the place of science in contemporary society.
| Originalsprog | Engelsk |
|---|---|
| Tidsskrift | Synthese |
| Vol/bind | 196 |
| Nummer | 3 |
| Sider (fra-til) | 819–832 |
| Antal sider | 13 |
| ISSN | 0039-7857 |
| Status | Udgivet - mar. 2019 |
| Udgivet eksternt | Ja |