General topics in the philosophy of science презентация

that branch of philosophy that reflects on and critically analyzes science. As a discipline, it tries to understand the aims and methods of science, along with its principles, practices, and achievements.

been dominant. It were logical positivists and logical empiricists, they set rigorous standards for the conduct of philosophy of science. Logical empiricists and logical positivists were also concerned with establishing clear meanings for all the terms used in science.

account of the bearing of history of science on the philosophy of science. Critics of the standard view cite Thomas Kuhn's Structure of Scientific Revolutions , which argues that most scientific textbooks ignore history and distort the real nature of progress in science.

of Scientific Theories
Scientific Change: Perspectives and Proposals

is to draw a sharp distinction between explaining why a particular phenomenon occurs and giving reasons for believing that it occurs. Аn explanation is an attempt to render understandable or intelligible some particular event or some general fact.

scientific explanations
that some scientific explanations are answers to how-possibly-questions
We will leave open the possibility that some explanations cannot suitably be requested by why-questions.

explanans.
The explanandum is the fact that is to be explained.
The explanans is that which does the explaining. It consists of whatever facts, particular or general, are summoned to explain the explanandum.

Explanation.
Scientific Explanation one of which is singled out as the conclusion of the argument. The remaining members of the set are premises.
There may be one or more premises; no fixed number of premises is required. The premises provide support for the conclusion.

deductive and inductive, and these types differ fundamentally from one another.
Inductive arguments come in different matter. In some inductions An argument is totally valid or it is in- the premises support the conclusions valid more strongly than in others.
Deductive validity and inductive correctness do not hinge on the truth of the premises or the conclusion of the argument.