Have one to sell?
Flip to back Flip to front
Listen Playing... Paused   You're listening to a sample of the Audible audio edition.
Learn more
See this image

Kuhn Vs Popper Hardcover – May 27 2003


See all 2 formats and editions Hide other formats and editions
Amazon Price New from Used from
Hardcover
"Please retry"
CDN$ 25.00 CDN$ 21.25

2014 Books Gift Guide
Thug Kitchen is featured in our 2014 Books Gift Guide. More gift ideas


Product Details

  • Hardcover: 192 pages
  • Publisher: Icon Books (May 27 2003)
  • Language: English
  • ISBN-10: 1840464682
  • ISBN-13: 978-1840464689
  • Product Dimensions: 10.6 x 3 x 17.8 cm
  • Shipping Weight: 281 g
  • Amazon Bestsellers Rank: #1,942,768 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

Product Description

Review

"Reading Steve Fuller is like reading Umberto Eco on speed." Jeff Hughes, University of Manchester

About the Author

Steve Fuller trained in the history and philosophy of science, and is now Professor of Sociology at the University of Warwick.

Inside This Book (Learn More)
Browse and search another edition of this book.
Browse Sample Pages
Front Cover | Copyright | Table of Contents | Excerpt | Back Cover
Search inside this book:

Customer Reviews

There are no customer reviews yet on Amazon.ca
5 star
4 star
3 star
2 star
1 star

Most Helpful Customer Reviews on Amazon.com (beta)

Amazon.com: 1 review
4 of 7 people found the following review helpful
Sociological fluff July 29 2009
By Viktor Blasjo - Published on Amazon.com
Format: Hardcover
This book is incoherent fluff. I do not have the patience to give more than one illustration of this very plain fact, so let us consider for example Chapter 8, which is called "So, why are philosophers of science pro-science?"

According to Fuller, "At work here is ... a relatively unnoticed legacy of Cold War science policy ... [which] encouraged the scientist to function less as a free agent who aims to transcend boundaries than a cognitive module who operates within strict parameters ... This ... was epitomised in Kuhn's valorisation of 'normal science'" (pp. 86-87).

Thus Fuller's answer to the title question is apparently that philosophers are pro-science because they aim to underwrite (or even "epitomise") certain societal values. But this is soon contradicted:

"From a psychiatric standpoint, the accounts of science put forward by the logical positivists and Kuhn ... were 'reaction formations' in response to traumas that had dealt severe blows to their normative ideal of science. The traumas were, respectively, the 20th century's two world wars. In response, they promoted excessively idealised visions of science that were the opposite of the tendencies they rejected in the science of their day. ... Kuhn responded to this situation much as the logical positivists had, namely, by never formally acknowledging the technological dimension of modern science" (p. 89).

So apparently philosophers were "traumatised" by the attitude that they themselves "epitomised." And not only did they epitomise it, they also "responded" to it by "promoting the opposite." Furthermore, they completely ignored the entire issue, as had every other philosopher of science before them for thousands of years. The natural way to explain this adherence to a millennia-old status quo is of course to postulate dramatic and unprecedented "traumas."


Feedback