Abstract
As with other metascientific problems, scientists as well as philosophers have contributed to the literature on the relations among theories. And, as usual, the two groups have done their best to ignore each other. In this case they have also managed to ignore a third group, which happens to be the most articulate of all: namely the logicians and mathematicians who have created the calculus of theories, model theory and categories, and have studied the formal relations among hypothetico-deductive systems. The unfortunate result of this lack of communication among the three groups is that we have three disjoint sets of studies. It is an urgent task of metascientists to intertwine these three separate threads with a view to producing a unified picture of intertheory relations.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
L. Sklar, ‘Types of Inter-theoretic Reduction’, Brit. J. Phil. Sci. 18 (1967) 109. Most of the examples are phony, none is analyzed. The whole thing is like a taxonomy of mythical animals.
E. Nagel, The Structure of Science, New York 1961, Ch. 11; and H. Feigl, The ‘Mental’and the ‘Physical’, Minneapolis 1967.
For a number of statements like this, sec L. Tisza, ‘The Conceptual Structure of Physics’, Reviews of Modern Physics 35 (1962) 151; and M. Strauss, ‘Intertheory Relations’, this volume, pp. 220–284.
L. de la Peña-Auerbach and L. S. Garcia-Colin, ‘Simple Generalization of Schrödinger’s Equation’, Journal of Mathematical Physics 9 (1968) 922 and previous papers cited therein.
H. Grad, ‘Levels of Description in Statistical Mechanics and Thermodynamics’, in Delaware Seminar in the Foundations of Physics (ed. by M. Bunge ), New York 1967.
A. Tarski, ‘Foundations of the Calculus of Systems’ (1935–1936), repr. in Logic, Semantics, Metamathematics, Oxford 1956, 342–83.
A. Tarski, ‘Contributions to the Theory of Models. I’, Indagationes Math. 57 (1954) 572. For B(T2) to be a subsystem of B(T1), it is necessary that they be similar, and they will be similar provided they are of the same order and, in addition, the corresponding predicates are of the same rank.
For the concept of persistent statement, see A. Robinson, Complete Theories, Amsterdam 1956, p. 12.
M. Bunge, Scientific Research, New York 1967, Vol. I, p. 226.
M. Bunge, ‘Physical Axiomatics’, Reviews of Modern Physics 39 (1967) 463.
A. Church, ‘Mathematics and Logic’, in Logic, Methodology and Philosophy of Science (ed. by E. Nagel, P. Suppes, and A. Tarski ), Stanford 1962.
On the other hand B. van Fraassen, ‘Presupposition, Implication, and Self-reference’, Journal of Philosophy 65 (1968) 136, introduces a notion of presupposition dependent on the one of entailment: he stipulates that A presupposes B iff both A and not-A semantically entail B. Criticism: (a) this definition does not recapture the intuitive notion of presupposition; (b) A might entail only a part of its background B: if it did not, it would add nothing to B; (c) the meaning ingredient is not taken care of.
M. Bunge, ‘Phenomenological Theories’, in The Critical Approach (ed. by M. Bunge ), New York 1964.
T. S. Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Chicago 1962.
P. K. Feyerabend, ‘Explanation, Reduction, and Empiricism’, in Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, Vol. III (ed. by H. Feigl and G. Maxwell), Minneapolis 1962.I have taken the liberty of substituting T2 for T and T1 for T′.
M. Bunge, Scientific Research, New York 1967, Vol. n, pp. 49–51 and 103–4.
For further criticisms, see J. A. Coffa, ‘Feyerabend on Explanation and Reduction’, Journal of Philosophy 64 (1967) 500; and E. Nagel, ‘Issues in the Logic of Reductive Explanation’, in Contemporary Philosophic Thought, Vol. 2 (ed. by H. Kiefer and M. Munitz), Albany. N.Y. 1970.
M. Bunge, Scientific Research, New York 1967, Vol. I, p. 71.
See reference 16.
M. Bunge, Scientific Research, New York 1967, Vol. I, pp. 500–3, Vol. II, pp. 336-43, and Theory Meets Experience’, in Contemporary Philosophic Thought, Vol. 2 (ed. by H. Kiefer and M. Munitz ), Albany, N.Y. 1970.
For criticism sec M. Bunge, Foundations of Physics, New York 1967; and ‘What are Physical Theories about?’, American Philosophical Quarterly, Monograph No. 3; Studies in the Philosophy of Science (1969), pp. 61–99.
M. Bunge, Foundations of Physics, New York 1967. For different but converging criticisms of the claim that quantum mechanics presupposes no quantum logic, see A. Fine,’Logic, Probability, and Quantum Theory’, Phil. Sci. 35 (1968) 101 and K. R. Popper. Bunge, Foundations of Physics, New York 1967. For different but converging criticisms of the claim that quantum mechanics presupposes no quantum logic, see A. Fine,’Logic, Probability, and Quantum Theory’, Phil. Sci. 35 (1968) 101 and K. R. Popper, ‘Birkhoff and von Neumann’s Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics’, Nature 219 (1968) 682.
Among them P. K. Feyerabend, ‘On a Recent Critique of Complementarity’, Phil. Sci. 35 (1968) 309; 36 (1969) 82; and M. Strauss, ‘Intertheory Relations’, this volume, pp. 220–284.
M. Bunge, ‘Laws of Physical Laws’, American Journal of Physics 29 (1961) 518, repr. in The Myth of Simplicity, Englewood Cliffs, N.J. 1963.
H. Margenau, The Nature of Physical Reality, New York 1950, Ch. 5; and M. Bunge, Scientific Research, New York 1967, Vol. II, pp. 346–56.
N. Bohr, Atomic Physics and Human Knowledge, New York 1958.
L. D. Landau and E. M. Lifshitz, Quantum Mechanics, London, Reading, Mass. 1958, p. 3.
H. Feigl, ‘The ‘Mental’ and the ‘Physical’’, in Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science (ed. by H. Feigl, M. Scriven, and G. Maxwell). Minneapolis 1958; and M. Bunge, Scientific Research, Vol. I, New York 1967, pp. 142–44 and 493–99.
M. Strauss, in ‘Intertheory Relations’, this volume, pp. 220–284, combines these two views with the intuitive approach discussed in Section 2.
J. H. Woodger, Biology and Language, Cambridge 1952, p. 271.
Reference
Günther Ludwig, Grundlegung physikalischer Theorien, speziell der Quantenmechanik, Parts I–III, Report from the Institut für Theoretische Physik der Universität Marburg.
Editor information
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1970 D. Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht-Holland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Bunge, M. (1970). Problems Concerning Intertheory Relations. In: Weingartner, P., Zecha, G. (eds) Induction, Physics and Ethics. Synthese Library, vol 31. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-3305-3_13
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-3305-3_13
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-010-3307-7
Online ISBN: 978-94-010-3305-3
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive