The Philosophies of Science: An Introductory Survey

by Rom Harré

Harre shows how various views about the nature of science are related to the great historical schools of philosophy. He sets out his argument in terms of concrete episodes in the history of science. This new edition includes a chapter on science and society, which explores issues such as the morality of experimentation on live animals and the premise that knowledge is a basis for moral good. Harre also examines the theory that science is a form of art, and looks at the way scientific knowledge affects out religious beliefs.

Genres: Philosophy, Nonfiction, Science

210 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1972

About the author

Rom Harré was Distinguished Professor in the Psychology Department of Georgetown University in Washington DC, and the Director of the Centre for Philosophy of Natural and Social Science in London. He was for many years the University Lecturer in Philosophy of Science at Oxford and Fellow of Linacre College. He began his career in mathematics and physics, turning later to the foundations of psychology. His research was directed to the use of models and other kinds of non-formal reasoning in the sciences, as well as a long series of studies on the role of causal powers and agency concepts in both natural and human sciences. He held Visiting Professorships in many places, including Australia, Spain and Japan. He was Honorary President of the International Society for the Philosophy of Chemistry.

Reviews

[Lysergius · Rating 4 out of 5]

Excellent overview of the various sides of the debate.

[Bernard English · Rating 4 out of 5]

Very commonsensical approach to the philosophy of science. The critiques of some of the well-known philosophies of science, especially positivism and operationalism, were particularly useful, and I thought well done.

He also manages to work in examples from a variety of fields, instead of overly focusing on the physical sciences, in particular physics, which is what some philosophers of science seem to do.

[Patrick Callier · Rating 3 out of 5]

Good intro, though judging by his slapdash treatment of subjects I am somewhat familiar with (philosophy of language, sociology of science), I wonder how accurate his treatment of the main subject matter is.