Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-16T04:01:41.361Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Roy Sorensen, Thought Experiments. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press 1992. Pp. xii + 318.

Review products

Roy Sorensen, Thought Experiments. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press 1992. Pp. xii + 318.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2020

James Robert Brown
James Robert Brown*
Affiliation:
University of TorontoToronto, ONCanadaM5S 1A1
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Critical Notice
Information
Canadian Journal of Philosophy , Volume 25 , Issue 1 , March 1995 , pp. 135 - 142
Copyright
Copyright © The Authors 1995

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Oxford: Oxford University Press 1988. Though opposed to the use of thought experiments, Wilkes does not shy from the far out. Much of her work is based on split-brain subjects. But these, her title reminds us, are real people.

2 See Norton, J. ‘Thought Experiments in Einstein's Work,’ in Horowitz, T. and Massey, G. eds., Thought Experiments in Science and Philosophy (Savage, MD: Rowman and Littlefield 1991)Google Scholar; and my The Laboratory of the Mind: Thought Experiments in the Natural Sciences (London and New York: Routledge 1991).

3 For criticisms see Brown, ‘Why Empiricism Won't Work,’ in Hull, D. Forbes, M. and Dkruhlik, K. eds., PSA 1992, vol. II (East Lansing, MI: Philosophy of Science Association 1993) 271–9Google Scholar; and for a defense see Norton's ‘Are Thought Experiments What You always Thought They Were?’ (forthcoming)

4 Tooley, M. ‘The Nature of Laws,’ Canadian Journal of Philosophy 7 (1977) 667–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar

5 For details see my The Laboratory of the Mind.