Philosophical Thought
eISSN : 0000-0000
10.5
citescore
CiteScore measures the average citations received per peer-reviewed document published in this title. CiteScore values are based on citation counts in a range of four years (e.g. 2018-2021) to peer-reviewed documents (articles, reviews, conference papers, data papers and book chapters) published in the same four calendar years, divided by the number of these documents in these same four years
10.5
impact factor
CiteScore measures the average citations received per peer-reviewed document published in this title. CiteScore values are based on citation counts in a range of four years (e.g. 2018-2021) to peer-reviewed documents (articles, reviews, conference papers, data papers and book chapters) published in the same four calendar years, divided by the number of these documents in these same four years (e.g. 2018 – 21).
10.5
pubmed
CiteScore measures the average citations received per peer-reviewed document published in this title. CiteScore values are based on citation counts in a range of four years (e.g. 2018-2021) to peer-reviewed documents (articles, reviews, conference papers, data papers and book chapters) published in the same four calendar years, divided by the number of these documents in these same four years (e.g. 2018 – 21).
10.5
Embase
Biosis Preview
Volume 2, Issue 3 (2022)
Geo Res 2022, 2(3): 269-282 |
Back to browse issues page
History
Received: 2022/05/18 | Accepted: 2022/08/24 | Published: 2022/09/19
Received: 2022/05/18 | Accepted: 2022/08/24 | Published: 2022/09/19
How to cite this article
Farsian K. Inconsistency in Science; an Argument for the Possibility of the Paraconsistent Philosophy of Science. Geo Res 2022; 2 (3) :269-282
URL: http://jpt.modares.ac.ir/article-6-64565-en.html
URL: http://jpt.modares.ac.ir/article-6-64565-en.html
Deptartment of Philosophy and Logic, Faculty of Humanities, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran
Abstract (4202 Views)
According to some important philosophers of science, such as Popper, Hempel and Tarski, consistency is a necessary condition of establishing any scientific theory. They hold that all inconsistent scientific theories are uninformative, meaningless or deficient. In this paper I will first argue against their clams, then I consider some inconsistencies which happened at the heart of some well-accepted scientific theories (Empirical or Non-Empirical), and by this I will try to open the door for the possibility of the paraconsistent philosophy of science.
Keywords: