Article ID | Journal | Published Year | Pages | File Type |
---|---|---|---|---|
1160782 | Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A | 2007 | 13 Pages |
Abstract
In this article I respond to the defences of the Strong Programme put forward by David Bloor and Márta Fehér in this issue. I dispute the claim that it is attention to only limited parts of the Strong Programme framework that allows me to argue that this approach: (i) leads to weak idealism, (ii) undermines the idea that theories have varying levels of instrumental success, and (iii) challenges the theoretical claims of scientific actors. Rather, I argue that these problematic positions are entailed by the constructionist tenets at the core of the Strong Programme.
Related Topics
Social Sciences and Humanities
Arts and Humanities
History
Authors
Stephen Kemp,