钝剑 发表于 2025-3-25 03:34:52
Problems of Intelligibility and Paradigm Instances,ogists and sociologists of knowledge for many years. It is clear from the principal papers, by Larry Laudan and David Bloor, that the encounter did not take on the characteristics of an ‘ideal speech situation’ wherein an ‘unconstrained consensus’ could be achieved. Nonetheless it marked something o慢跑 发表于 2025-3-25 08:31:25
The Rational and the Social in the History of Science,ms be shaped to some degree by social interests? And if these interests are themselves contingent features of the particular society, is there not an ineliminable contingency about even the most apparently secure scientific findings? How, then, can the rationality of science be said to transcend theHypopnea 发表于 2025-3-25 13:21:47
A Plague on Both Your Houses,declared out of bounds by no less authorities than Scheler and Mannheim,. but the Edinburgh-based advocates of the Strong Programme are trying to run the blockade. All science is ideology, they say, not least the sociological science of science-as-ideology. Laudan put a shot across Edinburgh’s bows啪心儿跳动 发表于 2025-3-25 16:59:37
http://reply.papertrans.cn/87/8628/862788/862788_24.png承认 发表于 2025-3-25 23:00:39
The Role of Arational Factors in Interpretive History: The Case of Kant and ESP,context for doing research it would be of no interest to sociologists; if it professed no epistemology it would be of little interest to philosophers. Philosophers of science (in growing numbers, it seems) find a challenge in the tenets of the strong programme. That challenge has largely to do withFinasteride 发表于 2025-3-26 00:18:05
http://reply.papertrans.cn/87/8628/862788/862788_26.pngMercantile 发表于 2025-3-26 07:14:17
http://reply.papertrans.cn/87/8628/862788/862788_27.pngetiquette 发表于 2025-3-26 12:06:26
http://reply.papertrans.cn/87/8628/862788/862788_28.png痛打 发表于 2025-3-26 13:42:05
http://reply.papertrans.cn/87/8628/862788/862788_29.png不法行为 发表于 2025-3-26 20:10:19
http://reply.papertrans.cn/87/8628/862788/862788_30.png