[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 46 KB, 361x400, ryoko-hirosue-2.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9142719 No.9142719[DELETED]  [Reply] [Original]

Are what the best books on philosophy of science /sci?

>> No.9142789

"how to stop attaching ugly asian girls to all my horrible posts" by Anonymous

See this excerpt:
"you haven't made a single good post on here and you need to stop posting" - page 1

>> No.9142795
File: 115 KB, 853x1200, 1501242404234.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9142795

>>9142719
>ugly asian girls

Shes not ugly

>> No.9142800

>>9142719
I wish I could help you. I think it's an underappreciated area and not that many books get written about it.

>> No.9143152

>>9142719
Any book that takes Popper's bullshit seriously is trash.

>> No.9143158

>>9142719
I really liked Kuhn's Structure of Scuentific Revolutions. Seemed like a good way to view the history and progression of science

>> No.9143177

>>9143152
>Any book that takes Popper's bullshit seriously is trash.
What book doesn`t takes Popper`s bullshit seriously?

>> No.9143217
File: 36 KB, 328x499, 51AFFSY6Y8L._SX326_BO1,204,203,200_.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9143217

This is the book i read for my philosophy of science class. It's pretty good, I particularly enjoyed Whewell.
You can skim over the boring parts if you want but powering through them is very rewarding because it gives a good understanding of how the thought has changed from our intuitions.
I have found the ideas very useful, and it will let you know what to read next if you're interested.

>> No.9143221

>/sci
gb2reddit

>> No.9143345

>>9143221
Quality post

>> No.9143467

>>9143217
A really great book, it's easy to read for philosophy of science beginners, and has interesting contents for statistics and probability majors too. Thanks anon.

>> No.9143774
File: 45 KB, 700x1079, etmg.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9143774

>>9143158
Seconding this. Really short and accasible too.

For some more heavy lifting I would suggest "Every Thing Must Go: Metaphysics Naturalized" by Ladyman and Ross.

>> No.9143813

>>9143158
This is step one. Kuhn and Popper are the Greeks of philosophy of science.

>> No.9143907

>>9142789
>ugly asian girls
wrong, Shaniqua.

>> No.9145008

>>9143774
thanks anon

>> No.9145363

>>9143813
>Kuhn and Popper are the Greeks of philosophy of science

In that they were wrong about everything. Like Sigmund Freud and Jean Piaget in Psychology.

>> No.9145367
File: 127 KB, 700x675, 1500802571806.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9145367

>>9145363
>In that they were wrong about everything.
>Greeks
Just... Dude.

>> No.9145510

>>9145363
Wrong makes very little sense in such a context. Philosophy improves by having progressively better methods of thought, not by being objectively right

>> No.9145588
File: 2.80 MB, 1156x1228, Kurt-Gödel 2.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
9145588

>>9145367
Aristotle held back science by 2000 years with his assumed bullshit.

>> No.9146104

>>9145588
No he didn't, greek philosophy was questioning que status quo of religion answers.
The guy invented logic ffs.