Abstract

This paper aims to explore some possibilities of application of the pluralist model for the choice of theories proposed by Howard Sankey. It claims that this model is effective to explain some problems associated with the rational theory-choice, such as the historical variability of the choice mechanisms, the epistemic components of the criteria and the risk of relativism. The paper states that the model is an interesting strategy to defend rationality preserving a version of the incommensurability thesis. The second section addresses the problem of the translatability of incommensurable theories and the varia-tion in meaning, with an emphasis on the concept of background natural language. The third section presents Sankey’s model, tracing antecedents in Kuhn, Feyerabend and Wittgenstein, and analyzing the thesis that states that no criterion of evaluation of theories is inviolable. The concept of rational disagreement is also discussed, using events of the Copernican revolution as reference. The section four continues with the issue of Copernicanism, focusing on the conditions for the breakdown of consensus in the scientific communities. Finally, the paper concludes by defending the functionality of Sankey’s model for dealing with problems associated with rationality.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.