Presentation. Mεtascience and the Bunge alternative

Mεtascience 1 (2020)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
More than any other philosopher, Mario Bunge is unclassifiable. In 1982 John Wettersten wrote about the discomfort and frustration that one might feel when reading Bunge’s work. He was trying to understand why his work was not seen as an alternative to the work of other philosophers. Wettersten’s answer relates to the problem of knowledge acquisition. If knowledge is contextual, relative to a frame of thought, how can we then rationally evaluate this frame of thought itself? Wettersten identifies two tendencies: either one maintains that frames of thought are chosen arbi- trarily, which leads to relativism, or one maintains that there is only one immutable frame of thought, which leads to dogmatism.
PhilPapers/Archive ID
MAUPMA
Upload history
Archival date: 2020-07-12
View other versions
Added to PP index
2020-07-12

Total views
65 ( #44,643 of 55,862 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
57 ( #12,728 of 55,862 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.