Biology & Philosophy

, Volume 23, Issue 1, pp 135–141 | Cite as

Forever beyond our grasp?

Review of P. Kyle Stanford (2006), Exceeding Our Grasp: Science, History, and the Problem of Unconceived Alternatives
Book Review

References

  1. Dietrich M, Skipper RA (forthcoming) Manipulating underdetermination in scientific controversy: The case of the molecular clock. Perspectives on ScienceGoogle Scholar
  2. Earman J (1992) Bayes or bust? A critical examination of Bayesian confirmation theory. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  3. Godfrey-Smith P (2003) Theory and reality: An introduction to the philosophy of science. The University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  4. Kitcher P (1990) The division of cognitive labor. J Phil 87(1):5–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Kitcher P (1993) The advancement of science. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  6. Laudan L (1981) A confutation of convergent realism. Phil Sci 48:19–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Platt JR (1964) Strong inference. Science 146:347–353CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Salmon WC (1990) Rationality and objectivity in science or Tom Kuhn meets Tom Bayes. In: Savage W (ed) Scientific theories, vol 14. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, pp 175–204Google Scholar
  9. Stanford PK (2006) Exceeding our grasp: Science, history, and the problem of unconceived alternatives. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  10. Strevens M (2003) The role of the priority rule in science. J Phil 100(2):55–79Google Scholar
  11. Strevens M (2006) The role of the Matthew effect in science. Studies History Phil Sci 37:159–170CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Van Fraassen BC (1980) The scientific image. Clarendon, OxfordGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Philosophy DepartmentTufts UniversityMedfordUSA

Personalised recommendations