Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-qs9v7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-08T07:17:11.511Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Normative Naturalism and the Role of Philosophy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2022

Alexander Rosenberg*
Affiliation:
Department of Philosophy University of California, Riverside

Abstract

The prescriptive force of methodological rules rests, I argue, on the acceptance of scientific theories; that of the most general methodological rules rests on theories in the philosophy of science, which differ from theories in the several sciences only in generality and abstraction. I illustrate these claims by reference to methodological disputes in social science and among philosophers of science. My conclusions substantiate those of Laudan except that I argue for the existence of transtheoretical goals common to all scientists and concrete enough actually to have bearing on methodology. And I argue that Laudan is committed to such goals himself, willy nilly.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © 1990 by the Philosophy of Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Laudan, L. (1984), Science and Values. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Laudan, L. (1987), “Progress or Rationality? The Prospects For Normative Naturalism,” American Philosophical Quarterly 24: 1931.Google Scholar
Popper, K. (1959), The Logic of Scientific Discovery. London: Hutchison University Library.Google Scholar
Rosenberg, A. (1985), “Methodology, Theory and the Philosophy of Science”, Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 66: 377393.10.1111/j.1468-0114.1985.tb00260.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar