Martin, Joseph D. (2013) 'Is the contingentist / inevitabilist debate a matter of degrees?', Philosophy of science., 80 (5). pp. 919-930.
The contingentist/inevitabilist debate contests whether the results of successful science are contingent or inevitable. This article addresses lingering ambiguity in the way contingency is defined in this debate. I argue that contingency in science can be understood as a collection of distinct concepts, distinguished by how they hold science contingent, by what elements of science they hold contingent, and by what those elements are contingent upon. I present a preliminary taxonomy designed to characterize the full-range positions available and illustrate that these constitute a diverse array rather than a spectrum.
|Full text:||(AM) Accepted Manuscript|
Download PDF (200Kb)
|Publisher Web site:||https://doi.org/10.1086/674003|
|Publisher statement:||© 2013 by University of Chicago Press.|
|Date accepted:||No date available|
|Date deposited:||02 October 2019|
|Date of first online publication:||2013|
|Date first made open access:||02 October 2019|
Save or Share this output
|Look up in GoogleScholar|