Sentences with phrase «philosophers of science view»

However, this does not mean that atheist philosophers of science view the actual universe as random.

Not exact matches

Whitehead, another mathematician - physicist - philosopher, had a similar view Thus our theological scheme is no longer as seriously at odds with science or the philosophy of science as it was in the days of classical or Newtonian physics.

A view held by many contemporary metaphysicians is that the problem of induction, so much discussed by philosophers of science, arises only because of mistaken metaphysical views; in particular views (deriving from Hume) about the nature of the causal relation and / or about the internal relations among different entities.1 Contrary to this view, I will try...

Working with Colin McGinn's ideas on consciousness Charlton illustrates the inconsistencies of philosophers who view mind as explainable by science, while suggesting himself that «the presence of mind in nature is not something invisible and hidden except to introspection, but the most palpable thing there is.

Modern philosophers of science are very aware of the impossibility of a God's eye view of the world.

Others, like myself, will decide to learn from his critique of the world view of modern science without wishing to become Whiteheadian organismic philosophers.

But in view of the power and tenacity of the scientistic ideology, which abhors the very idea of myth, it is not surprising that Whitehead has received so little attention from philosophers of science, despite his being one of the most original and creative thinkers of this century.

The earlier Whitehead was closer to the philosophy of science; the difficulties in his views are ones that philosophers of science can recognize.

I have suggested, however, that science is not as objective, nor religion as subjective, as the view dominant among philosophers of religion has held.

A view of scientific explanation as metaphorical has been developed as a supplement to the deductive model of explanation by some contemporary philosophers of science (Black 1962, pp. 25 - 47 and pp. 219 - 243; Hesse 1966, pp. 157 - 177; MacCormac 1971).

The received view among philosophers of science, whether they be of a regularity or necessity persuasion, is that a statement s is a law statement or nomological generalization if and only if it satisfies the following logically necessary specifications:

There are exactly parallel views of scientific models that have been held by many contemporary philosophers of science, namely, that models are purely subjective, psychological, and adopted by individuals for private heuristic purposes.

That seems to be a much better guideline than mutually contradictory views of philosophers of science (they are often interesting, but not so useful, partly, because they are contradictory without resolution of the differing views).