Systematicity and the Continuity Thesis

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift/Konferencebidrag i tidsskrift /Bidrag til avisTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

Standard

Systematicity and the Continuity Thesis. / Wray, K. Brad.

I: Synthese, Bind 196, Nr. 3, 03.2019, s. 819–832.

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift/Konferencebidrag i tidsskrift /Bidrag til avisTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review

Harvard

Wray, KB 2019, 'Systematicity and the Continuity Thesis', Synthese, bind 196, nr. 3, s. 819–832.

APA

Wray, K. B. (2019). Systematicity and the Continuity Thesis. Synthese, 196(3), 819–832.

CBE

Wray KB. 2019. Systematicity and the Continuity Thesis. Synthese. 196(3):819–832.

MLA

Wray, K. Brad. "Systematicity and the Continuity Thesis". Synthese. 2019, 196(3). 819–832.

Vancouver

Wray KB. Systematicity and the Continuity Thesis. Synthese. 2019 mar;196(3):819–832.

Author

Wray, K. Brad. / Systematicity and the Continuity Thesis. I: Synthese. 2019 ; Bind 196, Nr. 3. s. 819–832.

Bibtex

@article{3a4bb60e6d104a969d07736fba5e09a7,
title = "Systematicity and the Continuity Thesis",
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.",
keywords = "systematicity, common sense, continuity thesis, scientific knowledge, epistemic authority",
author = "Wray, {K. Brad}",
year = "2019",
month = "3",
language = "English",
volume = "196",
pages = "819–832",
journal = "Synthese",
issn = "0039-7857",
publisher = "Springer Netherlands",
number = "3",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Systematicity and the Continuity Thesis

AU - Wray, K. Brad

PY - 2019/3

Y1 - 2019/3

N2 - 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.

AB - 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.

KW - systematicity

KW - common sense

KW - continuity thesis

KW - scientific knowledge

KW - epistemic authority

M3 - Journal article

VL - 196

SP - 819

EP - 832

JO - Synthese

JF - Synthese

SN - 0039-7857

IS - 3

ER -