![]() ![]() ![]() 2014), that is, a turn towards scientific practice. In recent decades, many areas of philosophy of science have undergone what is now referred to as a “practice turn” (e.g., Soler et al. Distinguishing these three kinds of normativity gives rise to a nuanced and illuminating view of how philosophy of science can be normative. Metanormativity arises from the kind of claims that a philosophical theory contains, such as normative claims about science as it should be. Object normativity emerges from the fact that the object of philosophical theorizing can itself be normative, such as when philosophers discuss epistemic norms in science. Methodological normativity arises from normative assumptions that philosophers make when they select, interpret, evaluate, and mutually adjust relevant empirical information, on which they base their philosophical theories. It analyzes the normativity of philosophy of science by articulating three ways in which a philosophical theory can be normative. It argues that normativity is a multifaceted phenomenon rather than a general feature that a philosophical theory either has or lacks. This paper analyzes what it means for philosophy of science to be normative. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |