Abstract
In his latest book Kritik und Wissenschaftsgeschichte (Criticism and the History of Science, 1988), Gunnar Andersson clarifies the logical aspects of falsification and metalogical relationships between falsification, prediction and explanation. By analyzing the case studies on which Kuhn and Feyerabend have based their arguments for the incommensurability thesis, he shows that thesis to be untenable. A decisive criticism of the "new philosophy of science" is given. In the process Popper's methodology is developed further. It is shown that the "Kuhn Revolution" is indeed a pseudo-revolution.
Cite
CITATION STYLE
Radnitzky, G. (1990). Is Kuhn’s Revolution in the Philosophy of Science a Pseudo-Revolution? International Studies in Philosophy, 22(1), 77–78. https://doi.org/10.5840/intstudphil199022179
Register to see more suggestions
Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.