 Styles of Scientific Reasoning as Historiographical Metaphor: A Reply to Martin KuschAlberto Fragio ()
A chapter in Historical Epistemology of Ecological Economics, 2022, pp 1-9 from Springer Abstract: Abstract Martin Kusch’s critique of the historical epistemology of the styles of scientific reasoning qualifies as one of the most important contributions in the last decade to the understanding of this historiographical approach, often considered as a second historicist turn in history and philosophy of science. However, his criticism has not yet received an adequate response and the opportunity has been thereby missed to improve this kind of methodology in history of science. In this chapter, I will argue that the shortcomings pointed out by Kusch result from assuming a realistic conception of the styles of reasoning, as if they were actually existing structures that vertebrate the history of science, and not so much heuristic and discursive tools aimed to the production of historical narratives. Following Arnold I. Davidson’s insight, my basic claim is that the styles of reasoning should be taken as a special kind of metaphor, a “historiographical metaphor”, whose purpose is to express the different ways of doing science and writing its history in a context of epistemological pluralism. Date: 2022 There are no downloads for this item, see the EconPapers FAQ for hints about obtaining it. Related works: Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:conchp:978-3-030-94586-2_1 Ordering information: This item can be ordered from DOI: 10.1007/978-3-030-94586-2_1 Access Statistics for this chapter More chapters in Contributions to Economics from Springer |
Is your work missing from RePEc? Here is how to contribute.
Questions or problems? Check the EconPapers FAQ or send mail to .
EconPapers is hosted by the
School of Business at Örebro University.