Das Problem der Theorienbewertung
Identifieur interne : 001805 ( Istex/Corpus ); précédent : 001804; suivant : 001806Das Problem der Theorienbewertung
Auteurs : Gerard RadnitzkySource :
- Zeitschrift für allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie [ 0044-2216 ] ; 1979-03-01.
Abstract
Summary: O. The idea of scientific progress in contemporary philosophy of science. Explicating the concept of cognitive progress means at the same time articulating an ideal of science. A desirable ideal: explain a lot and offer certainty. 1. Working out the ideal with the “foundationalist-positivist” approach. If the question, “When is it rational to accept a theory?” is answered, “When it has sufficient inductive support,” this leads to insoluble problems. Reactions to the collapse of this approach — especially relativism and theory instrumentalism. 2. The Popperian alternative: rational theory preference despite fallibility of methods for determining truth or greater accuracy of representations. What good reasons can there be for the conjecture that one theory is superior to a competing theory in its achievement as a description? Achievements to date as fallible but objective indicators of strength in describing. The sorts of risks for a theory differ in explanation and in prediction. Corresponding to the risks are the chances for cognitive progress. Instead of a cumulative index, itemized indication of success and failure in explanation and prediction with regard for importance of the questions at issue. On the concept of the “scientific importance” of questions.Postscript: On the political consequences of the sceptical position in philosophy of science.
Url:
DOI: 10.1007/BF01809028
Links to Exploration step
ISTEX:87FB2441279132097C955E605B2709DDCC1A4CBALe document en format XML
<record><TEI wicri:istexFullTextTei="biblStruct"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="de">Das Problem der Theorienbewertung</title><author><name sortKey="Radnitzky, Gerard" sort="Radnitzky, Gerard" uniqKey="Radnitzky G" first="Gerard" last="Radnitzky">Gerard Radnitzky</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Universität Trier, FB1 — Wissenschaftstheorie, Postfach 3825, D-5500, Trier</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author></titleStmt><publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">ISTEX</idno><idno type="RBID">ISTEX:87FB2441279132097C955E605B2709DDCC1A4CBA</idno><date when="1979" year="1979">1979</date><idno type="doi">10.1007/BF01809028</idno><idno type="url">https://api.istex.fr/document/87FB2441279132097C955E605B2709DDCC1A4CBA/fulltext/pdf</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Corpus">001805</idno><idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Istex" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="ISTEX">001805</idno></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="de">Das Problem der Theorienbewertung</title><author><name sortKey="Radnitzky, Gerard" sort="Radnitzky, Gerard" uniqKey="Radnitzky G" first="Gerard" last="Radnitzky">Gerard Radnitzky</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Universität Trier, FB1 — Wissenschaftstheorie, Postfach 3825, D-5500, Trier</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author></analytic><monogr></monogr><series><title level="j">Zeitschrift für allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie</title><title level="j" type="abbrev">Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie</title><idno type="ISSN">0044-2216</idno><idno type="eISSN">1572-8587</idno><imprint><publisher>Kluwer Academic Publishers</publisher><pubPlace>Dordrecht</pubPlace><date type="published" when="1979-03-01">1979-03-01</date><biblScope unit="volume">10</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">1</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="67">67</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="97">97</biblScope></imprint><idno type="ISSN">0044-2216</idno></series><idno type="istex">87FB2441279132097C955E605B2709DDCC1A4CBA</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1007/BF01809028</idno><idno type="ArticleID">BF01809028</idno><idno type="ArticleID">Art6</idno></biblStruct></sourceDesc><seriesStmt><idno type="ISSN">0044-2216</idno></seriesStmt></fileDesc><profileDesc><textClass></textClass><langUsage><language ident="de">de</language></langUsage></profileDesc></teiHeader><front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en">Summary: O. The idea of scientific progress in contemporary philosophy of science. Explicating the concept of cognitive progress means at the same time articulating an ideal of science. A desirable ideal: explain a lot and offer certainty. 1. Working out the ideal with the “foundationalist-positivist” approach. If the question, “When is it rational to accept a theory?” is answered, “When it has sufficient inductive support,” this leads to insoluble problems. Reactions to the collapse of this approach — especially relativism and theory instrumentalism. 2. The Popperian alternative: rational theory preference despite fallibility of methods for determining truth or greater accuracy of representations. What good reasons can there be for the conjecture that one theory is superior to a competing theory in its achievement as a description? Achievements to date as fallible but objective indicators of strength in describing. The sorts of risks for a theory differ in explanation and in prediction. Corresponding to the risks are the chances for cognitive progress. Instead of a cumulative index, itemized indication of success and failure in explanation and prediction with regard for importance of the questions at issue. On the concept of the “scientific importance” of questions.Postscript: On the political consequences of the sceptical position in philosophy of science.</div></front></TEI><istex><corpusName>springer</corpusName><author><json:item><name>Gerard Radnitzky</name><affiliations><json:string>Universität Trier, FB1 — Wissenschaftstheorie, Postfach 3825, D-5500, Trier</json:string></affiliations></json:item></author><articleId><json:string>BF01809028</json:string><json:string>Art6</json:string></articleId><language><json:string>ger</json:string></language><originalGenre><json:string>OriginalPaper</json:string></originalGenre><abstract>Summary: O. The idea of scientific progress in contemporary philosophy of science. Explicating the concept of cognitive progress means at the same time articulating an ideal of science. A desirable ideal: explain a lot and offer certainty. 1. Working out the ideal with the “foundationalist-positivist” approach. If the question, “When is it rational to accept a theory?” is answered, “When it has sufficient inductive support,” this leads to insoluble problems. Reactions to the collapse of this approach — especially relativism and theory instrumentalism. 2. The Popperian alternative: rational theory preference despite fallibility of methods for determining truth or greater accuracy of representations. What good reasons can there be for the conjecture that one theory is superior to a competing theory in its achievement as a description? Achievements to date as fallible but objective indicators of strength in describing. The sorts of risks for a theory differ in explanation and in prediction. Corresponding to the risks are the chances for cognitive progress. Instead of a cumulative index, itemized indication of success and failure in explanation and prediction with regard for importance of the questions at issue. On the concept of the “scientific importance” of questions.Postscript: On the political consequences of the sceptical position in philosophy of science.</abstract><qualityIndicators><score>7.472</score><pdfVersion>1.3</pdfVersion><pdfPageSize>454 x 684 pts</pdfPageSize><refBibsNative>false</refBibsNative><keywordCount>0</keywordCount><abstractCharCount>1380</abstractCharCount><pdfWordCount>12195</pdfWordCount><pdfCharCount>89485</pdfCharCount><pdfPageCount>31</pdfPageCount><abstractWordCount>206</abstractWordCount></qualityIndicators><title>Das Problem der Theorienbewertung</title><refBibs><json:item><host><pages><first>403</first></pages><author><json:item><name> Vgl</name></json:item><json:item><name>Young Teich</name></json:item></author><publicationDate>1973</publicationDate></host></json:item><json:item><host><author><json:item><name>Z B Vgl</name></json:item></author><title>Zavadovsky in (Bukharin, 1931/1971) -ein Artikel, den Joseph Needham in seinem Vorwort zur Neuauflage yon 1971 besonders belobt</title></host></json:item><json:item><host><pages><first>134</first></pages><author><json:item><name> Vgl</name></json:item><json:item><name> Z61ter</name></json:item></author><publicationDate>1976</publicationDate></host></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>H Albert</name></json:item><json:item><name> Traktat Iiber Kritische</name></json:item><json:item><name> Vernunft</name></json:item></author><host><author></author><title>Albert, H. ,Die Wissenschaft und die Suche nach Wahrheit", in (Radnitzky und Andersson</title><publicationDate>1968</publicationDate></host><publicationDate>1968</publicationDate></json:item><json:item><host><author><json:item><name>G Andersson</name></json:item></author><title>Freiheit oder Finalisierung der Forschung</title><publicationDate>1976</publicationDate></host></json:item><json:item><host><author><json:item><name>G Andersson</name></json:item></author><title>Vetenskapens nytta och frihet (Nutzen und Freiheit der Wissenschaft) G6teborg: G6teborgs universitet</title><publicationDate>1976</publicationDate></host></json:item><json:item><host><pages><last>80</last><first>58</first></pages><author><json:item><name>G Andersson</name></json:item><json:item><name>Praxlbezug Erkermmisfortschritt</name></json:item></author><title>Zur Kritik der Idee einer emanzipatorischen Alternative in der Wissenschaft", in (Hubig und v</title><publicationDate>1978</publicationDate></host></json:item><json:item><host><author><json:item><name>G Andersson</name></json:item><json:item><name>Das Problem</name></json:item><json:item><name> Wahrheits~mlichkeit</name></json:item></author><publicationDate>1979</publicationDate></host></json:item><json:item><host><author><json:item><name>M Baldini</name></json:item><json:item><name> Gli Scienziati Ipocriti</name></json:item></author><title>Metodologia e storia della scienza</title><publicationDate>1978</publicationDate></host></json:item><json:item><host><author><json:item><name>W,W Bartley</name></json:item><json:item><name> Iii</name></json:item></author><title>Reply: Max Jammer on the interaction between science and philosophy," in (Re-Evalution, 1979), im Druck</title></host></json:item><json:item><host><author><json:item><name>G Braun</name></json:item><json:item><name>W Sch6nbohm</name></json:item></author><title>CDU-Programmatik: Grundlagen und Herausforderungen</title><publicationDate>1979</publicationDate></host></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>N Bukharin</name></json:item></author><host><author></author><title>Papers presented to the International Congress of the History of Science and Technology</title><publicationDate>1931</publicationDate></host><title>Sdence at the cross roads By the Delegates of the USSR</title><publicationDate>1931</publicationDate></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>M Bunge</name></json:item></author><host><author></author><title>Essays in honour of Karl R. Popper</title><publicationDate>1964</publicationDate></host><title>The critical approach to science and philosophy</title><publicationDate>1964</publicationDate></json:item><json:item><host><author><json:item><name>M Bunge</name></json:item></author><title>Philosophy of physics</title><publicationDate>1973</publicationDate></host></json:item><json:item><host><author><json:item><name>M Bunge</name></json:item></author><title>Foundations ofphysics</title><publicationDate>1977</publicationDate></host></json:item><json:item><host><pages><last>155</last><first>146</first></pages><author><json:item><name>M Bunge</name></json:item></author><title>The interpretation of Heisenberg's inequalities", in (Pfeifer, 1977) S</title><publicationDate>1977</publicationDate></host></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>V Cappeuetti</name></json:item><json:item><name>M Grmek</name></json:item></author><host><author></author><title>Engl. Fass.: On scientific discovery</title><publicationDate>1979</publicationDate></host><title>La scoperta scientifica. Roma: Arte Grafiche e Cossidente</title><publicationDate>1979</publicationDate></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>R,S Cohen</name></json:item><json:item><name>P Feyerabend</name></json:item><json:item><name>M Wartofsky</name></json:item></author><host><volume>39</volume><author></author><title>The Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science)</title><publicationDate>1976</publicationDate></host><title>(Hg.) Essays in memory ofImre Lakatos</title><publicationDate>1976</publicationDate></json:item><json:item><host><pages><last>124</last><first>88</first></pages><author><json:item><name>P Feyerabend</name></json:item></author><title>Die Wissenschaftstheorie -eine bisher unbekannte Form des Irrsinns?" in (Hiibner und Menne</title><publicationDate>1973</publicationDate></host></json:item><json:item><host><author><json:item><name>P Feyerabend</name></json:item></author><title>Against method Outline of an anarchistic theory of knowledge</title><publicationDate>1975</publicationDate></host></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>P Feyerabend</name></json:item><json:item><name>Marxist Fairytales</name></json:item><json:item><name> Australia</name></json:item></author><host><volume>20</volume><pages><last>397</last><first>372</first></pages><author></author><title>Inquiry</title><publicationDate>1977</publicationDate></host><publicationDate>1977</publicationDate></json:item><json:item><host><author><json:item><name>P Feyerabend</name></json:item></author><title>Science in a free society</title><publicationDate>1978</publicationDate></host></json:item><json:item><host><author><json:item><name>P Feyerabend</name></json:item></author><title>Der ~issenschaJ~stheoretische Realismus und die Autoritlit der Wissenschaf~en</title><publicationDate>1978</publicationDate></host></json:item><json:item><host><author><json:item><name>P Feyerabend</name></json:item></author><title>Eine Lanze ffir Aristoteles. Bemerkungen fiber Gehaltvermehrung</title><publicationDate>1979</publicationDate></host></json:item><json:item><host><author><json:item><name>P Feyerabend</name></json:item></author><title>Rationalism an the rise of science</title><publicationDate>1979</publicationDate></host></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>P Feyerabend</name></json:item></author><host><author></author><title>L~er die Methode. Ein Dialog", in (Radnitzky und Andersson</title><publicationDate>1980</publicationDate></host><publicationDate>1980</publicationDate></json:item><json:item><host><author><json:item><name>L Fleck</name></json:item></author><title>Entstehung und Entwicklung einer ¢aissenschaftlichen Tatsache Einfiihrung in die Lehre yore Denkstil und Denkkollektiven</title><publicationDate>1935</publicationDate></host></json:item><json:item><host><author><json:item><name>A Griinbaum</name></json:item><json:item><name> Popper Und Der Induktivismus</name></json:item></author><publicationDate>1979</publicationDate></host></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>W Heisenberg</name></json:item></author><host><pages><last>1081</last><first>95</first></pages><author></author><title>Thelrepresentationof nature incontemporaryphysics</title><publicationDate>1958</publicationDate></host><publicationDate>1958</publicationDate></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>C Huhlg</name></json:item><json:item><name>W Rahden</name></json:item></author><host><author></author><title>Hg). Konsequenzen kritischer Wissenschaftstheorie. Berlin: de Gruyter</title><publicationDate>1978</publicationDate></host><publicationDate>1978</publicationDate></json:item><json:item><host><author><json:item><name>K Hiibner</name></json:item><json:item><name>A Menne</name></json:item></author><publicationDate>1973</publicationDate></host></json:item><json:item><host><author><json:item><name>K Hiibner</name></json:item><json:item><name>N Lohkowicz</name></json:item><json:item><name>H Liibbe</name></json:item><json:item><name>G Und Radnitzky</name></json:item></author><title>Diepolitische Herausforderung der Wissenschaft. Gegen eine ideologisch verplante Forschung</title><publicationDate>1976</publicationDate></host></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>M Jammer</name></json:item></author><host><pages><last>863</last><first>849</first></pages><author></author><title>The Search for Absolute Values in a Changing World. Proceedings of the VIth International Conference on the Unity of the Sciences</title><publicationDate>1977-11</publicationDate></host><title>Physics and the search for the absolute</title><publicationDate>1977-11</publicationDate></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>M Jammer</name></json:item></author><host><author></author><title>L~ber die philosophischen Impllkationen der neuen Physik', in</title><publicationDate>1979</publicationDate></host><publicationDate>1979</publicationDate></json:item><json:item><host><author><json:item><name>M Jammer</name></json:item></author><title>The interaction between philosophy and science", in (Re-Evalution, 1979) im Druck</title><publicationDate>1979</publicationDate></host></json:item><json:item><host><author><json:item><name>T,S Kuhn</name></json:item></author><title>The structure of scientific revolutions</title><publicationDate>1962</publicationDate></host></json:item><json:item><host><pages><last>23</last><first>1</first></pages><author><json:item><name>T,S Kuhn</name></json:item></author><title>Logic of discovery of psychology of research?" in (Lakatos und Musgrave</title><publicationDate>1970</publicationDate></host></json:item><json:item><host><pages><last>195</last><first>91</first></pages><author><json:item><name>I Lakatos</name></json:item></author><title>Falsification and the methodology of scientific research programmes</title><publicationDate>1970</publicationDate></host></json:item><json:item><host><author><json:item><name>I Lakatos</name></json:item><json:item><name>A Musgrave</name></json:item></author><title>Criticism and the growth of knowledge</title><publicationDate>1970</publicationDate></host></json:item><json:item><host><author><json:item><name>G Marek</name></json:item><json:item><name> Et</name></json:item></author><title>Osterreichische Philosophie und ihr Einflufl auf das analytische Denken der Gegenwart Bd. I (Sonderband, Conceptus (Nr. 28-30)) Innsbruck: J. Zelger</title><publicationDate>1977</publicationDate></host></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>C Moulines</name></json:item></author><host><volume>10</volume><pages><last>88</last><first>59</first></pages><author></author><title>Critica</title><publicationDate>1978</publicationDate></host><title>Cuantificadores existenciales y principios-gula en las t~orias flsicas</title><publicationDate>1978</publicationDate></json:item><json:item><host><author><json:item><name>A,E Musgrave</name></json:item></author><title>Stlitzung durch Daten, Falsifikation, Heuristik und Anarchismus</title><publicationDate>1979</publicationDate></host></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>K P~er</name></json:item><json:item><name> Kritik</name></json:item><json:item><name> Erkenntnisfortschritt</name></json:item></author><host><author></author><title>Probleme Popperianischer Wissenschaftstheorie. Dissertation</title><publicationDate>1979</publicationDate></host><publicationDate>1979</publicationDate></json:item><json:item><host><author><json:item><name>H Pfeifer</name></json:item><json:item><name> Hg</name></json:item></author><title>Denken und Umdenken. Zu Werk und Wirkung yon Werner Heisenberg</title><publicationDate>1977</publicationDate></host></json:item><json:item><host><author><json:item><name>K Popper</name></json:item><json:item><name> Logik</name></json:item><json:item><name> Forschung</name></json:item></author><publicationDate>1934</publicationDate></host></json:item><json:item><host><author><json:item><name>K Popper</name></json:item></author><title>Conjectures and refutations</title><publicationDate>1963</publicationDate></host></json:item><json:item><host><author><json:item><name>K Popper</name></json:item></author><title>Objective kno~vledge. An evolutionary approach</title><publicationDate>1972</publicationDate></host></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>K Popper</name></json:item></author><host><volume>27</volume><pages><last>160</last><first>47</first></pages><author></author><title>The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science</title><publicationDate>1976</publicationDate></host><title>A note on verisimilitude</title><publicationDate>1976</publicationDate></json:item><json:item><host><author><json:item><name>K Popper</name></json:item><json:item><name>J Eccles</name></json:item></author><title>The self and its brain</title><publicationDate>1977</publicationDate></host></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>G Radnitzky</name></json:item></author><host><author></author><title>G6teborg: Esselte Studium und New York: Humanities Chicago, Ill. Gateway Editions</title><publicationDate>1968</publicationDate></host><title>Contemporary schools of metascience</title><publicationDate>1968</publicationDate></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>G Radnitzky</name></json:item></author><host><author></author><title>Preconceptions in research Literary Services & Production</title><publicationDate>1974</publicationDate></host><publicationDate>1974</publicationDate></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>G Radnitzky</name></json:item></author><host><volume>7</volume><pages><last>124</last><first>61</first></pages><author></author><title>Communication and Cognition</title><publicationDate>1974</publicationDate></host><title>From logic of science to theory of research</title><publicationDate>1974</publicationDate></json:item><json:item><host><pages><last>546</last><first>505</first></pages><author><json:item><name>G Radnitzky</name></json:item></author><title>Popperian philosophy of science as an antidote against relativism</title><publicationDate>1976</publicationDate></host></json:item><json:item><host><pages><last>51</last><first>24</first></pages><author><json:item><name>G Radnitzky</name></json:item><json:item><name> Dogmatik Und Skepsis</name></json:item></author><title>Folgen der Aufgabe der Wahrheitsidee flir Wissenschaft und Politik</title><publicationDate>1976</publicationDate></host></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>G Radnitzky</name></json:item></author><host><volume>7</volume><pages><last>403</last><first>367</first></pages><author></author><title>Zeits. fiir Allgem. Wissenschaftstheorie</title><publicationDate>1976</publicationDate></host><title>PrinzipieUe Probleme der Forschungspolitik</title><publicationDate>1976</publicationDate></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>G Radnitzky</name></json:item></author><host><volume>39</volume><pages><last>80</last><first>29</first></pages><author></author><title>Tijdschrift voor Filosofie</title><publicationDate>1977</publicationDate></host><title>Die Signaturen der ,analytischen Philosophic'. Zwei retrospektive Studien</title><publicationDate>1977</publicationDate></json:item><json:item><host><pages><last>282</last><first>249</first></pages><author><json:item><name>G Radnitzky</name></json:item><json:item><name> Philosophic Und Wissenschaftstheorie Zwischen Wittgenstein Und</name></json:item><json:item><name> Poppermarek</name></json:item></author><publicationDate>1977</publicationDate></host></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>G Radnitzky</name></json:item></author><host><pages><last>1036</last><first>1007</first></pages><author></author><title>Proceedings of the Vlth International Conference on the Unity of the Sdences</title><publicationDate>1977-11</publicationDate></host><title>The boundaries of science and technology in The Search for Absolute Values in a Changing World</title><publicationDate>1977-11</publicationDate></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>G Radnitzky</name></json:item></author><host><pages><last>493</last><first>459</first></pages><author></author><title>Die Sein-Sollen-Unterscheidung als Voranssetzung der liberalen Demokratie", in (Salamun</title><publicationDate>1979</publicationDate></host><publicationDate>1979</publicationDate></json:item><json:item><host><pages><last>40</last><first>3</first></pages><author><json:item><name>G Radnltzky</name></json:item></author><title>M&hodologie popp~rienne et recherche scientifique</title><publicationDate>1979</publicationDate></host></json:item><json:item><host><author><json:item><name>G Radnitzky</name></json:item></author><title>Progresso e rationalit~ neUa ricerca</title><publicationDate>1979</publicationDate></host></json:item><json:item><host><author><json:item><name>G Radnitzky</name></json:item></author><title>Theorienbegriindung oder begriindete Theorienpr~erenz</title><publicationDate>1979</publicationDate></host></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>G Radnitzky</name></json:item></author><host><author></author><title>Statt einer Besprechung'", Conceptus Nr ira Druck</title><publicationDate>1979</publicationDate></host><title>Gibt es ,Irrlehren, die die Freiheit der Wissenschaft bedrohen'? -Replik zu einer Apologie</title><publicationDate>1979</publicationDate></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>G Radnitzky</name></json:item><json:item><name>Der Verlust Der Unterschiede</name></json:item></author><host><author></author><title>im Druck</title><publicationDate>1979</publicationDate></host><title>Zur Ideologic der zeitgen6ssischen Epigonen yon Prokrustes</title><publicationDate>1979</publicationDate></json:item><json:item><host><author><json:item><name>G Radnitzky</name></json:item><json:item><name>G Und Andersson</name></json:item></author><title>Fortschritt und Rationalitdt der Wissenschaft</title><publicationDate>1979</publicationDate></host></json:item><json:item><host><pages><first>1980</first></pages><author><json:item><name>G Radnitzky</name></json:item><json:item><name>G Und Andersson</name></json:item></author><title>Voraussetzungen und Grenzen der Wissenschaft</title></host></json:item><json:item><author></author><host><author></author><title>The Re-evaluation of existing values and the search for absolute values. (Proceedings of the Seventh Internat. Conference on the Unity of the Sciences</title><publicationDate>1978-11</publicationDate></host><publicationDate>1978-11</publicationDate></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>N Rescher</name></json:item></author><host><author></author><title>Vollst~ndigkeit und Grenzen wissenschaftlichen Wissens", in (Radnitzky und Andersson</title><publicationDate>1980</publicationDate></host><publicationDate>1980</publicationDate></json:item><json:item><host><author><json:item><name>K Salamun</name></json:item></author><title>Sozialphilosophie als Aufkliirung. Festschrift fiir Ernst Topitsch</title><publicationDate>1979</publicationDate></host></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>P Schilpp</name></json:item></author><host><author></author><title>Sch6nbohm, W.-S</title><publicationDate>1974</publicationDate></host><title>The philosophy of Karl Popper (Library of Living Philosophers) 2 Bde. LaSalle, 111.: Open Court</title><publicationDate>1974</publicationDate></json:item><json:item><host><author><json:item><name>W Stegmiiller</name></json:item></author><title>Eine kombinierte Analyse der Theoriendynamik Verbesserung der historischen Deutungen des Theorienwandels dutch mengentheoretische Strukturen</title><publicationDate>1980</publicationDate></host></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>M Teich</name></json:item><json:item><name>R Young</name></json:item></author><host><author></author><title>Essays in honour of Joseph Needham</title><publicationDate>1973</publicationDate></host><title>Changing perspectives in the history of science</title><publicationDate>1973</publicationDate></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>J Watldns</name></json:item></author><host><author></author><title>Confirmation, the paradoxes and positivism", in (Bunge</title><publicationDate>1964</publicationDate></host><publicationDate>1964</publicationDate></json:item><json:item><host><author><json:item><name>J Watkins</name></json:item></author><title>Die Poppersche Analyse der wissenschaftlichen Erkennmis</title><publicationDate>1979</publicationDate></host></json:item><json:item><host><author><json:item><name>J Watldns</name></json:item></author><title>Die Bewiibrung und das Problem des Gehaltsvergleichs</title><publicationDate>1979</publicationDate></host></json:item><json:item><host><author><json:item><name>J Worrall</name></json:item></author><title>Wie die Methodologie der wissemchaftlichen Forschungsprogramme die Poppersche Methodologie verbessert</title><publicationDate>1979</publicationDate></host></json:item><json:item><host><author><json:item><name>E Zahar</name></json:item></author><title>Experlmenta crucis: Untersuchung eines Beispiels</title><publicationDate>1979</publicationDate></host></json:item><json:item><author><json:item><name>M,Die Z611er</name></json:item><json:item><name> Unfdhigkeit Zur Politik</name></json:item><json:item><name> Politikbegriff Und Wissenschaftsverstiindnis Yon Humboldt Bis Habermas</name></json:item><json:item><name> Opladen</name></json:item></author><host><volume>3825</volume><pages><last>201</last><first>1</first></pages><issue>651</issue><author></author><title>Postfach</title><publicationDate>1976</publicationDate></host><title>Adresse des Autors: Prof. Dr. Gerard Radnitzky</title><publicationDate>1976</publicationDate></json:item></refBibs><genre><json:string>research-article</json:string></genre><host><volume>10</volume><pages><last>97</last><first>67</first></pages><issn><json:string>0044-2216</json:string></issn><issue>1</issue><subject><json:item><value>Philosophy of Education</value></json:item><json:item><value>Philosophy of Science</value></json:item><json:item><value>History</value></json:item><json:item><value>Communication</value></json:item><json:item><value>Methodology of the Social Sciences</value></json:item></subject><journalId><json:string>10838</json:string></journalId><genre><json:string>journal</json:string></genre><language><json:string>unknown</json:string></language><eissn><json:string>1572-8587</json:string></eissn><title>Zeitschrift für allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie</title><publicationDate>1979</publicationDate><copyrightDate>1979</copyrightDate></host><publicationDate>1979</publicationDate><copyrightDate>1979</copyrightDate><doi><json:string>10.1007/BF01809028</json:string></doi><id>87FB2441279132097C955E605B2709DDCC1A4CBA</id><score>0.77574825</score><fulltext><json:item><extension>pdf</extension><original>true</original><mimetype>application/pdf</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/87FB2441279132097C955E605B2709DDCC1A4CBA/fulltext/pdf</uri></json:item><json:item><extension>zip</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>application/zip</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/87FB2441279132097C955E605B2709DDCC1A4CBA/fulltext/zip</uri></json:item><istex:fulltextTEI uri="https://api.istex.fr/document/87FB2441279132097C955E605B2709DDCC1A4CBA/fulltext/tei"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="de">Das Problem der Theorienbewertung</title><title level="a" type="sub" xml:lang="de">Begründungsphilosophischer, skeptischer und fallibilistischer Denkstil in der Wissenschaftstheorie</title><respStmt><resp>Références bibliographiques récupérées via GROBID</resp><name resp="ISTEX-API">ISTEX-API (INIST-CNRS)</name></respStmt><respStmt><resp>Références bibliographiques récupérées via GROBID</resp><name resp="ISTEX-API">ISTEX-API (INIST-CNRS)</name></respStmt></titleStmt><publicationStmt><authority>ISTEX</authority><publisher>Kluwer Academic Publishers</publisher><pubPlace>Dordrecht</pubPlace><availability><p>Franz Steiner Verlag GmbH, 1979</p></availability><date>1979</date></publicationStmt><notesStmt><note>Aufsätze</note></notesStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct type="inbook"><analytic><title level="a" type="main" xml:lang="de">Das Problem der Theorienbewertung</title><title level="a" type="sub" xml:lang="de">Begründungsphilosophischer, skeptischer und fallibilistischer Denkstil in der Wissenschaftstheorie</title><author xml:id="author-1"><persName><forename type="first">Gerard</forename><surname>Radnitzky</surname></persName><affiliation>Universität Trier, FB1 — Wissenschaftstheorie, Postfach 3825, D-5500, Trier</affiliation></author></analytic><monogr><title level="j">Zeitschrift für allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie</title><title level="j" type="abbrev">Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie</title><idno type="journal-ID">10838</idno><idno type="pISSN">0044-2216</idno><idno type="eISSN">1572-8587</idno><idno type="issue-article-count">14</idno><idno type="volume-issue-count">2</idno><imprint><publisher>Kluwer Academic Publishers</publisher><pubPlace>Dordrecht</pubPlace><date type="published" when="1979-03-01"></date><biblScope unit="volume">10</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">1</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="67">67</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="97">97</biblScope></imprint></monogr><idno type="istex">87FB2441279132097C955E605B2709DDCC1A4CBA</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1007/BF01809028</idno><idno type="ArticleID">BF01809028</idno><idno type="ArticleID">Art6</idno></biblStruct></sourceDesc></fileDesc><profileDesc><creation><date>1979</date></creation><langUsage><language ident="de">de</language></langUsage><abstract xml:lang="en"><p>Summary: O. The idea of scientific progress in contemporary philosophy of science. Explicating the concept of cognitive progress means at the same time articulating an ideal of science. A desirable ideal: explain a lot and offer certainty. 1. Working out the ideal with the “foundationalist-positivist” approach. If the question, “When is it rational to accept a theory?” is answered, “When it has sufficient inductive support,” this leads to insoluble problems. Reactions to the collapse of this approach — especially relativism and theory instrumentalism. 2. The Popperian alternative: rational theory preference despite fallibility of methods for determining truth or greater accuracy of representations. What good reasons can there be for the conjecture that one theory is superior to a competing theory in its achievement as a description? Achievements to date as fallible but objective indicators of strength in describing. The sorts of risks for a theory differ in explanation and in prediction. Corresponding to the risks are the chances for cognitive progress. Instead of a cumulative index, itemized indication of success and failure in explanation and prediction with regard for importance of the questions at issue. On the concept of the “scientific importance” of questions.Postscript: On the political consequences of the sceptical position in philosophy of science.</p></abstract><textClass><keywords scheme="Journal Subject"><list><head>Philosophy</head><item><term>Philosophy of Education</term></item><item><term>Philosophy of Science</term></item><item><term>History</term></item><item><term>Communication</term></item><item><term>Methodology of the Social Sciences</term></item></list></keywords></textClass></profileDesc><revisionDesc><change when="1979-03-01">Published</change><change xml:id="refBibs-istex" who="#ISTEX-API" when="2016-11-22">References added</change><change xml:id="refBibs-istex" who="#ISTEX-API" when="2017-01-20">References added</change></revisionDesc></teiHeader></istex:fulltextTEI><json:item><extension>txt</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>text/plain</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/87FB2441279132097C955E605B2709DDCC1A4CBA/fulltext/txt</uri></json:item></fulltext><metadata><istex:metadataXml wicri:clean="Springer, Publisher found" wicri:toSee="no header"><istex:xmlDeclaration>version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"</istex:xmlDeclaration><istex:docType PUBLIC="-//Springer-Verlag//DTD A++ V2.4//EN" URI="http://devel.springer.de/A++/V2.4/DTD/A++V2.4.dtd" name="istex:docType"></istex:docType><istex:document><Publisher><PublisherInfo><PublisherName>Kluwer Academic Publishers</PublisherName><PublisherLocation>Dordrecht</PublisherLocation></PublisherInfo><Journal><JournalInfo JournalProductType="ArchiveJournal" NumberingStyle="Unnumbered"><JournalID>10838</JournalID><JournalPrintISSN>0044-2216</JournalPrintISSN><JournalElectronicISSN>1572-8587</JournalElectronicISSN><JournalTitle>Zeitschrift für allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie</JournalTitle><JournalAbbreviatedTitle>Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie</JournalAbbreviatedTitle><JournalSubjectGroup><JournalSubject Type="Primary">Philosophy</JournalSubject><JournalSubject Type="Secondary">Philosophy of Education</JournalSubject><JournalSubject Type="Secondary">Philosophy of Science</JournalSubject><JournalSubject Type="Secondary">History</JournalSubject><JournalSubject Type="Secondary">Communication</JournalSubject><JournalSubject Type="Secondary">Methodology of the Social Sciences</JournalSubject></JournalSubjectGroup></JournalInfo><Volume><VolumeInfo VolumeType="Regular" TocLevels="0"><VolumeIDStart>10</VolumeIDStart><VolumeIDEnd>10</VolumeIDEnd><VolumeIssueCount>2</VolumeIssueCount></VolumeInfo><Issue IssueType="Regular"><IssueInfo TocLevels="0"><IssueIDStart>1</IssueIDStart><IssueIDEnd>1</IssueIDEnd><IssueArticleCount>14</IssueArticleCount><IssueHistory><CoverDate><DateString>1979</DateString><Year>1979</Year><Month>3</Month></CoverDate></IssueHistory><IssueCopyright><CopyrightHolderName>Franz Steiner Verlag GmbH</CopyrightHolderName><CopyrightYear>1979</CopyrightYear></IssueCopyright></IssueInfo><Article ID="Art6"><ArticleInfo Language="De" ArticleType="OriginalPaper" NumberingStyle="Unnumbered" TocLevels="0" ContainsESM="No"><ArticleID>BF01809028</ArticleID><ArticleDOI>10.1007/BF01809028</ArticleDOI><ArticleSequenceNumber>6</ArticleSequenceNumber><ArticleTitle Language="De">Das Problem der Theorienbewertung</ArticleTitle><ArticleSubTitle Language="De">Begründungsphilosophischer, skeptischer und fallibilistischer Denkstil in der Wissenschaftstheorie</ArticleSubTitle><ArticleCategory>Aufsätze</ArticleCategory><ArticleFirstPage>67</ArticleFirstPage><ArticleLastPage>97</ArticleLastPage><ArticleHistory><RegistrationDate><Year>2005</Year><Month>5</Month><Day>14</Day></RegistrationDate></ArticleHistory><ArticleCopyright><CopyrightHolderName>Franz Steiner Verlag GmbH</CopyrightHolderName><CopyrightYear>1979</CopyrightYear></ArticleCopyright><ArticleGrants Type="Regular"><MetadataGrant Grant="OpenAccess"></MetadataGrant><AbstractGrant Grant="OpenAccess"></AbstractGrant><BodyPDFGrant Grant="Restricted"></BodyPDFGrant><BodyHTMLGrant Grant="Restricted"></BodyHTMLGrant><BibliographyGrant Grant="Restricted"></BibliographyGrant><ESMGrant Grant="Restricted"></ESMGrant></ArticleGrants><ArticleContext><JournalID>10838</JournalID><VolumeIDStart>10</VolumeIDStart><VolumeIDEnd>10</VolumeIDEnd><IssueIDStart>1</IssueIDStart><IssueIDEnd>1</IssueIDEnd></ArticleContext></ArticleInfo><ArticleHeader><AuthorGroup><Author AffiliationIDS="Aff1"><AuthorName DisplayOrder="Western"><GivenName>Gerard</GivenName><FamilyName>Radnitzky</FamilyName></AuthorName><Contact><Phone>(651) 201-2342/3/4</Phone></Contact></Author><Affiliation ID="Aff1"><OrgName>Universität Trier</OrgName><OrgAddress><Street>FB1 — Wissenschaftstheorie</Street><Postbox>Postfach 3825</Postbox><Postcode>D-5500</Postcode><City>Trier</City></OrgAddress></Affiliation></AuthorGroup><Abstract ID="Abs1" Language="En"><Heading>Summary</Heading><Para>O. The idea of scientific progress in contemporary philosophy of science. Explicating the concept of cognitive progress means at the same time articulating an ideal of science. A desirable ideal: explain a lot and offer certainty. 1. Working out the ideal with the “foundationalist-positivist” approach. If the question, “When is it rational to accept a theory?” is answered, “When it has sufficient inductive support,” this leads to insoluble problems. Reactions to the collapse of this approach — especially relativism and theory instrumentalism. 2. The Popperian alternative: rational theory preference despite fallibility of methods for determining truth or greater accuracy of representations. What good reasons can there be for the conjecture that one theory is superior to a competing theory in its achievement as a description? Achievements to date as fallible but objective indicators of strength in describing. The sorts of risks for a theory differ in explanation and in prediction. Corresponding to the risks are the chances for cognitive progress. Instead of a cumulative index, itemized indication of success and failure in explanation and prediction with regard for importance of the questions at issue. On the concept of the “scientific importance” of questions.<Emphasis Type="Italic">Postscript</Emphasis>: On the political consequences of the sceptical position in philosophy of science.</Para></Abstract><ArticleNote Type="Misc"><SimplePara>Dieser Essay entstand teils aus einem Plenarvortrag beim „Europäischen Forum Alpbach 1978“, teils aus Gastvorträgen bei der Japan Association for the Philosophy of Science in Tokyo im September 1978 und bei der Eighth ICUS in Boston im November 1978. Einige der angesprochenen Themen werden ausführlicher behandelt in (Radnitzky, 1979d). Herrn Dr. Gunnar Andersson und Herrn Dr. Klaus Pähler danke ich für viele Gespräche, Kritik und Anregungen.</SimplePara></ArticleNote></ArticleHeader><NoBody></NoBody></Article></Issue></Volume></Journal></Publisher></istex:document></istex:metadataXml><mods version="3.6"><titleInfo lang="de"><title>Das Problem der Theorienbewertung</title><subTitle>Begründungsphilosophischer, skeptischer und fallibilistischer Denkstil in der Wissenschaftstheorie</subTitle></titleInfo><titleInfo type="alternative" contentType="CDATA" lang="de"><title>Das Problem der Theorienbewertung</title><subTitle>Begründungsphilosophischer, skeptischer und fallibilistischer Denkstil in der Wissenschaftstheorie</subTitle></titleInfo><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Gerard</namePart><namePart type="family">Radnitzky</namePart><affiliation>Universität Trier, FB1 — Wissenschaftstheorie, Postfach 3825, D-5500, Trier</affiliation><role><roleTerm type="text">author</roleTerm></role></name><typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource><genre type="research-article" displayLabel="OriginalPaper"></genre><originInfo><publisher>Kluwer Academic Publishers</publisher><place><placeTerm type="text">Dordrecht</placeTerm></place><dateIssued encoding="w3cdtf">1979-03-01</dateIssued><copyrightDate encoding="w3cdtf">1979</copyrightDate></originInfo><language><languageTerm type="code" authority="rfc3066">de</languageTerm><languageTerm type="code" authority="iso639-2b">ger</languageTerm></language><physicalDescription><internetMediaType>text/html</internetMediaType></physicalDescription><abstract lang="en">Summary: O. The idea of scientific progress in contemporary philosophy of science. Explicating the concept of cognitive progress means at the same time articulating an ideal of science. A desirable ideal: explain a lot and offer certainty. 1. Working out the ideal with the “foundationalist-positivist” approach. If the question, “When is it rational to accept a theory?” is answered, “When it has sufficient inductive support,” this leads to insoluble problems. Reactions to the collapse of this approach — especially relativism and theory instrumentalism. 2. The Popperian alternative: rational theory preference despite fallibility of methods for determining truth or greater accuracy of representations. What good reasons can there be for the conjecture that one theory is superior to a competing theory in its achievement as a description? Achievements to date as fallible but objective indicators of strength in describing. The sorts of risks for a theory differ in explanation and in prediction. Corresponding to the risks are the chances for cognitive progress. Instead of a cumulative index, itemized indication of success and failure in explanation and prediction with regard for importance of the questions at issue. On the concept of the “scientific importance” of questions.Postscript: On the political consequences of the sceptical position in philosophy of science.</abstract><note>Aufsätze</note><relatedItem type="host"><titleInfo><title>Zeitschrift für allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie</title></titleInfo><titleInfo type="abbreviated"><title>Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie</title></titleInfo><genre type="journal" displayLabel="Archive Journal"></genre><originInfo><dateIssued encoding="w3cdtf">1979-03-01</dateIssued><copyrightDate encoding="w3cdtf">1979</copyrightDate></originInfo><subject><genre>Philosophy</genre><topic>Philosophy of Education</topic><topic>Philosophy of Science</topic><topic>History</topic><topic>Communication</topic><topic>Methodology of the Social Sciences</topic></subject><identifier type="ISSN">0044-2216</identifier><identifier type="eISSN">1572-8587</identifier><identifier type="JournalID">10838</identifier><identifier type="IssueArticleCount">14</identifier><identifier type="VolumeIssueCount">2</identifier><part><date>1979</date><detail type="volume"><number>10</number><caption>vol.</caption></detail><detail type="issue"><number>1</number><caption>no.</caption></detail><extent unit="pages"><start>67</start><end>97</end></extent></part><recordInfo><recordOrigin>Franz Steiner Verlag GmbH, 1979</recordOrigin></recordInfo></relatedItem><identifier type="istex">87FB2441279132097C955E605B2709DDCC1A4CBA</identifier><identifier type="DOI">10.1007/BF01809028</identifier><identifier type="ArticleID">BF01809028</identifier><identifier type="ArticleID">Art6</identifier><accessCondition type="use and reproduction" contentType="copyright">Franz Steiner Verlag GmbH, 1979</accessCondition><recordInfo><recordContentSource>SPRINGER</recordContentSource><recordOrigin>Franz Steiner Verlag GmbH, 1979</recordOrigin></recordInfo></mods></metadata><serie></serie></istex></record>Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Wicri/Rhénanie/explor/UnivTrevesV1/Data/Istex/Corpus
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 001805 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Istex/Corpus/biblio.hfd -nk 001805 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien
|wiki= Wicri/Rhénanie
|area= UnivTrevesV1
|flux= Istex
|étape= Corpus
|type= RBID
|clé= ISTEX:87FB2441279132097C955E605B2709DDCC1A4CBA
|texte= Das Problem der Theorienbewertung
}}
| This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.31. |  |