The title of this work is to be taken seriously: it is a small book for teaching students to read the language of determinism. Some prior knowledge of college-level mathematics and physics is presupposed, but otherwise the book is suitable for use in an advanced undergraduate or beginning graduate course in the philosophy of science. While writing I had in mind primarily a philosophical audience, but I hope that students and colleagues from the sciences will also find the treatment of scientific issues of interest. Though modest in not trying to reach beyond an introductory level of analysis, the work is decidedly immodest in trying to change a number of misimpressions that pervade the philosophical literature. For example, when told that classical physics is not the place to look for clean and unproblematic examples of determinism, most philosophers react with a mixture of disbelief and incomprehension. The misconcep tions on which that reaction is based can and must be changed."

Devoted to the history of general relativity, this text provides reviews from scholars all over the world. Many of the papers originated at the Third International Conference on the History of General Relativity, held at the University of Pittsburgh in the summer of 1991. Topics covered include: disputes with Einstein; the empirical basis of general relativity; variational principles in general relativity; the reception and development of general relativity; and cosmology and general relativity.

Natural and social sciences seem very often to hedge their laws by ceteris paribus clauses - a practice which is philosophically very hard to understand because such clauses seem to render the laws trivial and unfalsifiable. This volume collects the most prominent philosophers of science in the field and presents a lively, controversial, but well-integrated, highly original discussion of the issue. It will be the reference book in the coming years concerning ceteris paribus laws.

This book is the first serious, book-length study of the philosophical implications of relativity. It explains the relevant technical issues of general relativity theory and discusses how these issues bear upon philosophical problems about the nature of space and time, causality and laws of nature. Features include an analysis of time travel, The Big Bang and the Horizon Problem, Eternal Recurrence and Cyclic Time amongst other much debated issues today which have been brought to light in the the face of a series of theorems, due largely to Stephen Hawking and Roger Penrose. Written by a leading philosopher, this book provides an overview of the technical literature as well as analytical commentary on its philosophical significance.

Natural and social sciences seem very often, though usually only implicitly, to hedge their laws by ceteris paribus clauses - a practice which is philosophically very hard to understand because such clauses seem to render the laws trivial and unfalsifiable. After early worries the issue is vigorously discussed in the philosophy of science and the philosophy of mind since ca. 15 years.
This volume collects the most prominent philosophers of science in the field and presents a lively, controversial, but well-integrated, highly original and up-to-date discussion of the issue. It will be the reference book in the coming years concerning ceteris paribus laws.

A reprint of the Prentice-Hall edition of 1992. Prepared by nine distinguished philosophers and historians of science, this thoughtful reader represents a cooperative effort to provide an introduction to the philosophy of science focused on cultivating an understanding of both the workings of science and its historical and social context. Selections range from discussions of topics in general methodology to a sampling of foundational problems in various physical, biological, behavioral, and social sciences. Each chapter contains a list of suggested readings and study questions.

By situating Hume's famous work "Of Miracles" (which notoriously argues against the possiblity of miracles) in the context of the 18th century debate on miracles, Earman shows that Hume's argument is largely unoriginal, and largely without merit where it is original. On the positive side, he shows how progress can be made on the issues, so provocatively posed in Hume's essay, about the ability of eyewitness testimony to establish the credibility of marvelous and miraculous events. Earman's work is simultaneously a contribution to the history of ideas, the philosophy of religion, and to probability and induction.

By situating Hume's famous work "Of Miracles" (which notoriously argues against the possiblity of miracles) in the context of the 18th century debate on miracles, Earman shows that Hume's argument is largely unoriginal, and largely without merit where it is original. On the positive side, he shows how progress can be made on the issues, so provocatively posed in Hume's essay, about the ability of eyewitness testimony to establish the credibility of marvelous and miraculous events. Earman's work is simultaneously a contribution to the history of ideas, the philosophy of religion, and to probability and induction.

A reprint of the Prentice-Hall edition of 1992. Prepared by nine distinguished philosophers and historians of science, this thoughtful reader represents a cooperative effort to provide an introduction to the philosophy of science focused on cultivating an understanding of both the workings of science and its historical and social context. Selections range from discussions of topics in general methodology to a sampling of foundational problems in various physical, biological, behavioral, and social sciences. Each chapter contains a list of suggested readings and study questions.

Bayes or Bust? provides the first balanced treatment of the complex set of issues involved in this nagging conundrum in the philosophy of science. There is currently no viable alternative to the Bayesian analysis of scientific inference, yet the available versions of Bayesianism fail to do justice to several aspects of the testing and confirmation of scientific hypotheses. Bayes or Bust? provides the first balanced treatment of the complex set of issues involved in this nagging conundrum in the philosophy of science. Both Bayesians and anti-Bayesians will find a wealth of new insights on topics ranging from Bayes's original paper to contemporary formal learning theory. In a paper published posthumously in 1763, the Reverend Thomas Bayes made a seminal contribution to the understanding of "analogical or inductive reasoning." Building on his insights, modem Bayesians have developed an account of scientific inference that has attracted numerous champions as well as numerous detractors. Earman argues that Bayesianism provides the best hope for a comprehensive and unified account of scientific inference, yet the presently available versions of Bayesianisin fail to do justice to several aspects of the testing and confirming of scientific theories and hypotheses. By focusing on the need for a resolution to this impasse, Earman sharpens the issues on which a resolution turns.

These provocative essays by leading philosophers of science exemplify and illuminate the contemporary uncertainty and excitement in the field. The papers are rich in new perspectives, and their far-reaching criticisms challenge arguments long prevalent in classic philosophical problems of induction, empiricism, and realism. By turns empirical or analytic, historical or programmatic, confessional or argumentative, the authors' arguments both describe and demonstrate the fact that philosophy of science is in a ferment more intense than at any time since the heyday of logical positivism early in the twentieth century.   Contents:   “Thoroughly Modern Meno,� Clark Glymour and Kevin Kelly “The Concept of Induction in the Light of the Interrogative Approach to Inquiry,� Jaakko Hintikka “Aristotelian Natures and Modern Experimental Method,� Nancy Cartwright “Genetic Inference: A Reconsideration of “David Hume's Empiricism,� Barbara D. Massey and Gerald J. Massey “Philosophy and the Exact Sciences: Logical Positivism as a Case Study,� Michael Friedman “Language and Interpretation: Philosophical Reflections and Empirical Inquiry,� Noam Chomsky “Constructivism, Realism, and Philosophical Method,� Richard Boyd “Do We Need a Hierarchical Model of Science?� Diderik Batens “Theories of Theories: A View from Cognitive Science,� Richard E. Grandy “Procedural Syntax for Theory Elements,� Joseph D. Sneed “Why Functionalism Didn't Work,� Hilary Putnam “Physicalism,� Hartry Field  This title is part of UC Press's Voices Revived program, which commemorates University of California Press’s mission to seek out and cultivate the brightest minds and give them voice, reach, and impact. Drawing on a backlist dating to 1893, Voices Revived makes high-quality, peer-reviewed scholarship accessible once again using print-on-demand technology. This title was originally published in 1992.

These provocative essays by leading philosophers of science exemplify and illuminate the contemporary uncertainty and excitement in the field. The papers are rich in new perspectives, and their far-reaching criticisms challenge arguments long prevalent in classic philosophical problems of induction, empiricism, and realism. By turns empirical or analytic, historical or programmatic, confessional or argumentative, the authors' arguments both describe and demonstrate the fact that philosophy of science is in a ferment more intense than at any time since the heyday of logical positivism early in the twentieth century.   Contents:   “Thoroughly Modern Meno,� Clark Glymour and Kevin Kelly “The Concept of Induction in the Light of the Interrogative Approach to Inquiry,� Jaakko Hintikka “Aristotelian Natures and Modern Experimental Method,� Nancy Cartwright “Genetic Inference: A Reconsideration of “David Hume's Empiricism,� Barbara D. Massey and Gerald J. Massey “Philosophy and the Exact Sciences: Logical Positivism as a Case Study,� Michael Friedman “Language and Interpretation: Philosophical Reflections and Empirical Inquiry,� Noam Chomsky “Constructivism, Realism, and Philosophical Method,� Richard Boyd “Do We Need a Hierarchical Model of Science?� Diderik Batens “Theories of Theories: A View from Cognitive Science,� Richard E. Grandy “Procedural Syntax for Theory Elements,� Joseph D. Sneed “Why Functionalism Didn't Work,� Hilary Putnam “Physicalism,� Hartry Field  This title is part of UC Press's Voices Revived program, which commemorates University of California Press’s mission to seek out and cultivate the brightest minds and give them voice, reach, and impact. Drawing on a backlist dating to 1893, Voices Revived makes high-quality, peer-reviewed scholarship accessible once again using print-on-demand technology. This title was originally published in 1992.

"Testing Scientific Theories " was first published in 1984. Minnesota Archive Editions uses digital technology to make long-unavailable books once again accessible, and are published unaltered from the original University of Minnesota Press editions.

Since much of a scientist's work consists of constructing arguments to show how experiments and observation bear on a particular theory, the methodologies of theory testing and their philosophical underpinnings are of vital concern to philosophers of science. Confirmation of scientific theories is the topic of Clark Glymour's important book "Theory and Evidence," published in 1980. His negative thesis is that the two most widely discussed accounts of the methodology of theory testing - hypothetico-deductivism and Bayesianism - are flawed. The issues Glymour raises and his alternative "bootstrapping" method provided the focus for a conference sponsored by the Minnesota Center for Philosophy of Science and for this book. As editor John Earman says in his preface, the papers presented in "Testing Scientific Theories " germinate so many new ideas that philosophers of science will reap the harvest for years to come.

Topics covered include a discussion of Glymour's bootstrapping theory of confirmation, the Bayesian perspective and the problems of old evidence, evidence and explanation, historical case studies, alternative views on testing theories, and testing particular theories, including psychoanalytic hypotheses and hypotheses about the completeness of the fossil record.

"Foundations of Space-Time Theories " was first published in 1977. Minnesota Archive Editions uses digital technology to make long-unavailable books once again accessible, and are published unaltered from the original University of Minnesota Press editions.

The essays in this volume are based on the papers given at a conference on the philosophical aspects of the space-time theory held under the auspices of the Minnesota Center for Philosophy of Science.