Hostname: page-component-7f64f4797f-kjzhn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-11-04T02:06:28.267Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Spirit of Logical Empiricism: Carl G. Hempel's Role in Twentieth-Century Philosophy of Science

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2022

Wesley C. Salmon
Wesley C. Salmon*
Affiliation:
Department of Philosophy, University of Pittsburgh
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this paper, I discuss the key role played by Carl G. Hempel's work on theoretical realism and scientific explanation in effecting a crucial philosophical transition between the beginning and the end of the twentieth century. At the beginning of the century, the dominant view was that science is incapable of furnishing explanations of natural phenomena; at the end, explanation is widely viewed as an important, if not the primary, goal of science. In addition to its intellectual benefits, this transition has important practical consequences with respect to dealing with the global problems humans everywhere will face in the twenty-first century.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 66 , Issue 3 , September 1999 , pp. 333 - 350
Copyright
Copyright © 1999 by the Philosophy of Science Association

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

†

Send requests for reprints to the author, Department of Philosophy, University of Pittsburgh, 1001 Cathedral of Learning, Pittsburgh, PA 15260-6299.

‡

I am extremely grateful to Philip Kitcher and Peter Lipton for many helpful comments on earlier drafts of this paper.

References

Carnap, R. (1928). Der Logische Aufbau der Welt. Berlin-Schlachtensee: Weltkreis Verlag.Google Scholar
Carnap, R. (1949), “Truth and Confirmation”, in Feigl, H. and Sellars, W. (eds.), Readings in Philosophical Analysis. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 119–127.Google Scholar
Carnap, R. (1950), “Empiricism, Semantics, and Ontology”, Revue internationale de philosophie 4e année: 20–40.Google Scholar
Carnap, R. (1956), “The Methodological Character of Theoretical Concepts”, in Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science 1. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 38–76.Google Scholar
Carnap, R. (1963), “Carl G. Hempel on Scientific Theories”, in Schilpp 1963, 958–966.Google Scholar
Carnap, R. (1966). Philosophical Foundations of Physics. Edited by Gardner, Martin. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Carnap, R. (1967), The Logical Structure of the World. Berkeley: University of California Press. Translation of Carnap 1928 by R. A. George.Google Scholar
Carnap, R. (1974), An Introduction to the Philosophy of Science. New York: Basic Books. Reissue, with modifications, of Carnap 1966.Google Scholar
Eberle, R. et al. (1961), “Hempel and Oppenheim on Explanation”, Philosophy of Science 28: 418–428.10.1086/287828CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friedman, M. (1974), “Explanation and Scientific Understanding”, Journal of Philosophy 71: 5–19.10.2307/2024924CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glymour, C. (1980), Theory and Evidence. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Goodman, N. (1951). The Structure of Appearance. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Hempel, C. G. (1945), “Studies in the Logic of Confirmation”, Mind 54: 1–26, 97–121. Reprinted in Hempel 1965.10.1093/mind/LIV.213.1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hempel, C. G. (1950), “Problems and Changes in the Empiricist Criterion of Meaning”, Revue Internationale de Philosophie 11: 41–63.Google Scholar
Hempel, C. G. (1951), “The Concept of Cognitive Significance: A Reconsideration”, Proceedings of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences 80: 61–77.10.2307/20023635CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hempel, C. G. (1952), Fundamentals of Concept Formation in Empirical Science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. (International Encyclopedia of Unified Science, vol. II, no. 7.)Google Scholar
Hempel, C. G. (1958), “The Theoretician's Dilemma: A Study in the Logic of Theory Construction”, in Feigl, H., Scriven, M., and Maxwell, G. (eds.), Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science II. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 37–98. Reprinted in Hempel 1965.Google Scholar
Hempel, C. G. (1962), “Deductive-Nomological vs. Statistical Explanation”, in Feigl, H. and Maxwell, G. (eds.), Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science III. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 98–169.Google Scholar
Hempel, C. G. (1963), “Implications of Carnap's Work for the Philosophy of Science”, in Schilpp 1963, 685–709.Google Scholar
Hempel, C. G. (1965). Aspects of Scientific Explanation and Other Essays in the Philosophy of Science. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Hempel, C. G. and Oppenheim, P. (1948), “Studies in the Logic of Explanation”, Philosophy of Science 15: 135–175. Reprinted, with a 1964 Postscript, in Hempel 1965.10.1086/286983CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jeffrey, R. C. (1965), The Logic of Decision. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Kaplan, D. (1961), “Explanation Revisited”, Philosophy of Science 28: 429–436.10.1086/287829CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, J. (1963), “Discussion: On the Logical Conditions of Deductive Explanation”, Philosophy of Science 30: 286–291.10.1086/287943CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuhn, T. (1962), The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Lewis, C. I. (1946), An Analysis of Knowledge and Valuation. La Salle, IL: Open Court.Google Scholar
Nye, M. J. (1972), Molecular Reality. London: Macdonald.Google Scholar
Parrini, P. (1994), “With Carnap, Beyond Carnap: Metaphysics, Science, and the Realism/Instrumentalism Controversy”, in Salmon and Wolters 1994, 255–277.Google Scholar
Pearson, Karl ([1911] 1957), The Grammar of Science, 3rd ed. New York: Meridian Books.Google Scholar
Perrin, J. (1913), Les Atoms. Paris: Alcan.Google Scholar
Perrin, J. (1923), Atoms. Translation of Perrin 1913 by Hammick, D. L. New York: Van Nostrand, 255–277.Google Scholar
Reichenbach, H. (1933), “Rudolf Carnap, Der Logische Aufbau der Welt”, Kantstudien 38: 199–201.Google Scholar
Reichenbach, H. (1935), Wahrscheinlichkeitslehre. Leyden: A. W. Sijthoff's Uitggeversmaatschappij.Google Scholar
Reichenbach, H. (1938), Experience and Prediction. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Reichenbach, H. (1949), The Theory of Probability. Berkeley: University of California Press. Translation of Reichenbach 1935 by E. H. Hutten and M. Reichenbach. Second enlarged edition of Reichenbach 1935.Google Scholar
Reichenbach, H. (1956), The Direction of Time. Berkeley: University of California Press.10.1063/1.3059791CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reisch, G. A. (1991), “Did Kuhn Kill Logical Empiricism?” Philosophy of Science 58: 264–277.10.1086/289615CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Salmon, M. (1982), Philosophy and Archaeology. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Salmon, W. (1988), “Deductivism Visited and Revisited”, in Grünbaum, A. and Salmon, W. (eds.), The Limitations of Deductivism. Berkeley: University of California Press, 95–127.Google Scholar
Salmon, W. (1990a), Four Decades of Scientific Explanation. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Salmon, W. (1990b), “Rationality and Objectivity in Science, or Tom Kuhn Meets Tom Bayes”, in Savage, W. (ed.), Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 175–204.Google Scholar
Salmon, W. (1994), “Carnap, Hempel, and Reichenbach on Scientific Realism”, in Salmon and Wolters 1994, 237–254.Google Scholar
Salmon, W. and Wolters, G. (eds.) (1994), Logic, Language, and the Structure of Scientific Theories. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press/Konstanz: Universitätsverlag Konstanz.Google Scholar
Schilpp, P. A. (ed.) (1963), The Philosophy of Rudolf Carnap. La Salle, IL: Open Court.Google Scholar
Sobel, D. (1995), Longitude. New York: Walker and Co.Google Scholar
van Fraassen, B. (1980), The Scientific Image. Oxford: Clarendon Press.10.1093/0198244274.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weinberg, S. (1992), Dreams of a Final Theory. New York: Vintage Books.Google Scholar