Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Refine search results

Journals help

  1. 2 Filozofia (Philosophy)

Authors help

  1. 1 Taliga M.

  2. 1 Čukljević F.

Years help

  1. 1 2021

  2. 1 2016

Results found: 2

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  EMPIRICAL CONTENT
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
1

JE POPPEROVA FALZIFIKOVATEĽNOSŤ KRITÉRIOM DEMARKÁCIE?

100%
Taliga M.
Filozofia (Philosophy)
|
2016
|
vol. 71
|
issue 8
644 – 655
EN
The paper highlights Popper’s falsifiability as the demarcation criterion neither of science nor of empirical science, but of empirical content. The difference is of utmost importance for several reasons. First, it shows that the most widespread criticisms of Popper’s criterion are misguided. Second, it sheds new light on the relations between being empirical and being scientific. Third, it explains what still remains typical of empiricism after it has been purged from the three dogmas as described by Quine and Davidson. The paper elaborates on all the three points.
2

McDOWELL AND BRANDOM ON OBSERVATIONAL KNOWLEDGE

100%
Čukljević F.
Filozofia (Philosophy)
|
2021
|
vol. 76
|
issue 6
423 – 435
EN
In this paper, I will analyse whether John McDowell’s critique of Robert Brandom’s account of observational knowledge is a success. First, I will present Brandom’s view of observational knowledge. Then I will lay out the main objections that McDowell raises against it. I will argue that McDowell’s arguments can be divided into semantic and epistemic. The analysis will show that the epistemic arguments face serious difficulty and that McDowell should focus on semantic critique.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.