Join today and start reading your favorite books for Free!
Rate this book!
Write a review?
the book begins with the "dean's challenge" -- can a philosopher shed any light on scientific enquiry (especially the relationship between evidence and hypotheses) that is useful to actual scientists. then, the rest is an attempt to make good on this challenge. there are at lest two fundamental problems: (1) this presumes that philosophers haven't had much to say that should interest scientists, which is false (see Scientific Reasoning by Howson and Urbach); (2) the author puts forward an "ord...
Hard going. Very tediously written & a joy to finish. Shame because there's some good stuff in there which the author tries hard to hide.Improved a bit on second reading (after a few months) - I promoted it from 2 to 3 stars. But still harder going than it needs to be. I felt there was a leaner, clearer, more engaging book struggling to get out.