A Comment on Nadel's Operationalization of Incommensurability
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 11924704 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Henk Zandvoort (Department of Philosophy, State University of Groningen, Westersingel 19, 9718 CA Groningen, The Netherlands., corresponding author) |
| Year | 1984 |
| Volume | 14 |
| Issue | 3 |
| Pages | 443-446 |
| Publication date | 1984-08-01 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Social Studies of Science (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0306-3127 • E-ISSN: 1460-3659 |
| Publisher | SAGE Publishing (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.1177/030631284014003005 |
| OpenAlex | W2016182009 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 1 |
| References cited | 1 |
In a recent paper in this journal, Edward Nadel proposes an operationalization of Kuhnian incommensurability in terms of citation behaviour.IAccording to Nadel this operationalization should be of service in evaluating the relative historical adequacy of Kuhn's view of competition between theories, according to which incommensurability is an influential factor, as compared to views that deny a role of such a factor, like the position defended by Popper. In this Response I argue that the validity of the operationalization, and its merits for discriminating between the theories of scientific development under discussion, are throughout in doubt. Kuhn's notion of incommensurability is characterized by Nadel as follows
Citation · Economics · Epistemology · Operationalization · Political science · Positive economics · Sociology · Biomedical Text Mining and Ontologies · Law · Philosophy · Philosophy and History of Science · Science and Climate Studies
| Citations per year | 0.02 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 1984 - 1984 (1) |
| Highly cited | No |