Advertisement

Synthese

, Volume 196, Issue 3, pp 907–928 | Cite as

Replies

  • Paul Hoyningen-HueneEmail author
S.I.: Systematicity - The Nature of Science
  • 369 Downloads

Abstract

In this article, I reply to the preceding articles by Naomi Oreskes, Chrysostomos Mantzavinos, Brad Wray, Sarah Green, Alexander Bird, and Timothy Lyons. These articles contain a number of objections and suggestions concerning systematicity theory, as developed in my book Systematicity: The Nature of Science (Oxford University Press 2013).

Keywords

Systematicity theory Demarcation criterion Scientific rationality Continuity thesis Science education Clinical medicine Socratic scientific realism 

Notes

Acknowledgements

I wish to thank the three editors both for organizing this special issue of Synthese and for very fruitful comments on an earlier version of this paper, including linguistic improvements by Hasok Chang.

References

  1. Abbott, B. P., et al. (2016). Observation of gravitational waves from a binary black hole merger. Physical Review Letters, 116(6), 061102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bird, A. (2008). Incommensurability naturalized. In L. Soler, H. Sankey, & P. Hoyningen-Huene (Eds.), Rethinking scientific change and theory comparison: Stabilities, ruptures, incommensurabilities? (pp. 21–39). Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bird, A. (2017). Systematicity, knowledge, and bias. How systematicity made clinical medicine a science. Synthese.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-017-1342-y.
  4. Carneiro, R. L. (2000). The transition from quantity to quality: A neglected causal mechanism in accounting for social evolution. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 97(23), 12926–12931.  https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.240462397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Carrier, M. (2015). Systematizität: Eine systematische Charakterisierung von Wissenschaft? Kommentar zu Paul Hoyningen-Huenes Systematicity. Zeitschrift für philosophische Forschung, 69(2), 230–234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Engels, F. (1962 [1925]). “Dialektik der Natur”. In K. Marx, & F. Engels (Ed.), Werke (vol. 20, pp. 305–455). Berlin: Dietz Verlag.Google Scholar
  7. Feyerabend, P. K. (1958). An attempt at a realistic interpretation of experience. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 58, 143–170. Reprinted in Realism, rationalism and scientific method: Philosophical papers (vol. 1, pp. 17–36). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Green, S. (2016). Science and common sense: Perspectives from philosophy and science education. Synthese.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-016-1276-9.Google Scholar
  9. Hawking, S. W., & Mlodinow, L. (2010). The grand design. London: Bantam.Google Scholar
  10. Hawking, S., & Penrose, R. (1996). The nature of space and time. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Hempel, C. G. (1983). Valuation and objectivity in science. In R. S. Cohen & L. Laudan (Ed.), Physics, philosophy and psychoanalysis: Essays in honor of Adolf Grünbaum (pp. 73–100). Dordrecht: Reidel (reprinted in C. G. Hempel & J. H. Fetzer (Ed.) (2001) The philosophy of Carl G. Hempel (pp. 372–395). Oxford: Oxford University Press).Google Scholar
  12. Hoyningen-Huene, P. (1992). The interrelations between the philosophy, history and sociology of science in Thomas Kuhn’s theory of scientific development. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 43(4), 487–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hoyningen-Huene, P. (2008). Commentary on Bird’s paper. In L. Soler, H. Sankey, & P. Hoyningen-Huene (Eds.), Rethinking scientific change and theory comparison: Stabilities, ruptures, incommensurabilities? (pp. 41–46). Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hoyningen-Huene, P. (2013). Systematicity: The nature of science. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hoyningen-Huene, P. (2015). Repliken. Zeitschrift für philosophische Forschung, 69(2), 243–246.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Hoyningen-Huene, P. (2016). Am Exempel der Homöopathie: Zur Abgrenzung von Wissenschaft und Pseudowissenschaft. Gyn-aktiv, 2016(6), 13.Google Scholar
  17. Hoyningen-Huene, P. (2018a). Are there good arguments against scientific realism? In A. Christian, D. Hommen, N. Retzlaff, & G. Schurz (Eds.), Philosophy of science. Between the natural sciences, the social sciences, and the humanities. Heidelberg: Springer.Google Scholar
  18. Hoyningen-Huene, P. (2018b). Worin könnten die Einheit und die Vielfalt der Wissenschaften bestehen? In M. Seidel (Ed.), Einheit und Vielfalt der Wissenschaften.Google Scholar
  19. Lewars, E. (2016). Computational chemistry: Introduction to the theory and applications of molecular and quantum mechanics (3rd ed.). Cham: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lyons, T. D. (2017). Systematicity theory meets Socratic scientific realism: The systematic quest for truth. Synthese.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-017-1561-2.Google Scholar
  21. Mantzavinos, C. (2016). The nature of science. A dialogue. Synthese.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-016-1154-5.Google Scholar
  22. Oberheim, E. (2007). Feyerabend’s philosophy. Berlin: de Gruyter.Google Scholar
  23. Oreskes, N. (2017). Systematicity is necessary but not sufficient: On the problem of facsimile science. Synthese.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-017-1481-1.Google Scholar
  24. Pietraß, M. (2017). Towards systematicity. Comparing from the perspective of philosophy of science. Research in Comparative and International Education, 12(3), 276–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Scholz, O. (2015). Wissenschaft, Systematizität und Methoden. Anmerkungen zu Paul Hoyningen-Huenes Systematicity. The nature of science. Zeitschrift für philosophische Forschung, 69(2), 235–242.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Seidel, M. (2014). Rezension von Paul Hoyningen-Huene: Systematicity. The nature of science. Zeitschrift für philosophische Literatur, 2(4), 33–38.Google Scholar
  27. Thalos, M. (2015). Review of systematicity. Mind, 124(493), 351–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Weber, M. (2005). Philosophy of experimental biology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Wootton, D. (2006). Bad medicine: Doctors doing harm since Hippocrates. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Wray, K. Brad. (2016). Systematicity and the continuity thesis. Synthese.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-016-1088-y.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of PhilosophyLeibniz Universität HannoverHanoverGermany
  2. 2.Department of EconomicsUniversität ZürichZurichSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations