The debate in the philosophy of science between empiricism (positivism) and realism is not so much a debate concerning howscience is or has been practised, as one concerning how it ought to be practised. Empiricists, for their part, view the aim of science as the affording of truth, and want therefore to exclude from science any activity of a hypothetical nature. Realists, on the other hand, see the aim of science as concerning understanding as well as truth, and view informed speculation about the nature of the real world as a worthwhile attempt to obtain such understanding.
CITATION STYLE
Empiricism Vs. Realism Revisited. (2007). In Boston Studies in the Philosophy and History of Science (Vol. 173, pp. 183–192). Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4020-3838-9_9
Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.