This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Garrison, J. W. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Some Principles of Postpositivistic Philosophy of Science

Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University

In recent years there has been a great deal of methodological debate among educational researchers, theoreticians, and practitioners concerning issues such as relativism raised by the so-called "new," "Kuhnian" or "postpositivistic" philosophy of science. The intensity of this debate notwithstanding, the fundamental principles and their relations that comprise the postpositivistic view have not always been carefully spelled out. Some of the principles discussed will include (a) the problem of confirmation, (b) the underdetermination of theory by logic, (c) the underdetermination of theory by experience, (d) the Quine-Duhem thesis, (e) the theory-ladenness of experience, and (f) the incommensurability of theories. No attempt will be made to evaluate these principles. However, those who are prepared to accept all of these will be hard pressed to avoid the dangers of relativism. I will argue that these dangers, if they exist, may be lessened if not eliminated by practicing the pragmatic virtues of epistemological conservatism and good sense.

Educational Researcher, Vol. 15, No. 9, 12-18 (1986)
DOI: 10.3102/0013189X015009012


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				M. S. Moses Chapter 1: The Heart of the Matter: Philosophy and Educational Research Review of Research in Education, January 1, 2002; 26(1): 1 - 21. [PDF]

				M. Eisenhart Research news and Comment Educational Researcher, December 1, 1995; 24(9): 32 - 33. [PDF]

				S. W. Raudenbush Book Reviews: Summarizing Evidence: Crusaders for Simplicity Educational Researcher, October 1, 1991; 20(7): 33 - 37. [PDF]

				E. R. House Realism in Research Educational Researcher, August 1, 1991; 20(6): 2 - 9. [Abstract] [PDF]

				S. I. MILLER and M. FREDERICKS Postpositivistic Assumptions and Educational Research: Another View Educational Researcher, May 1, 1991; 20(4): 2 - 8. [Abstract] [PDF]

				K. Howe and M. Eisenhart Standards for Qualitative (and Quantitative) Research: A Prolegomenon Educational Researcher, May 1, 1990; 19(4): 2 - 9. [Abstract] [PDF]

				H. H. Marshall Work or Learning Implications of Classroom Metaphors Educational Researcher, December 1, 1988; 17(9): 9 - 16. [Abstract] [PDF]

				K. R. Howe Against the Quantitative-Qualitative Incompatibility Thesis or Dogmas Die Hard Educational Researcher, November 1, 1988; 17(8): 10 - 16. [Abstract] [PDF]