Lista elaborada por Silvio Seno Chibeni (Unicamp) e Marcos Rodrigues da Silva (UEL)
Agassi,
E.-Pauri, M. The Reality of the Unobservable, Kluwer, 2000.
ALEXANDER,
H.G. General Statements as Rules of Inference? In: FEIGL et al. 1958 (M.S.P.S.
vol. 2), pp.309-329.
Alexander,
P. (1977) “Boyle and Locke On Primary and Secondary Qualities” in Locke on Human Understanding (ed. Tipton, I.C.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Alspector-Kelly,
M. (2001) “Should the Empiricist Be a Constructive Empiricist?” in Philosophy of Science 68.
Aronson,
J., Harré, R. et al. Realism Rescued, Open Court, Chicago, 1995
ASQUITH,
P.D. & GIERE, R.N. (eds.). PSA 1980 vol. 2. East Lansing,
Philosophy os Science Association, 1981.
AYER, A.J.
(ed.) Logical Positivism. New York,
The Free Press, 1959.
Belousek,
Darrin W., “Falsification, the Duhem-Quine Thesis, and Scientific Realism: From
a Phenomenological Point of View”, Journal of the British Society for
Phenomenology 1998, 29 (2). 145-161.
BERKELEY,
G. A
Treatise concerning the Principles of Human Knowledge. Encyclopedia
Britannica, The Great Books of the Western World, vol. 35, pp. 401-44.
University of Chicago Press, 1952. (1a ed. 1710.)
Berkeley,
G. (1951) De Motu in The Works of
George Berkeley Bishop of Cloyne [ed. Luce, A, Jessop, T.]. Nelson and
Sons: London.
Bhat, P.R.
and Sahu, Gopal, “Quine on observation Sentences”, Indian Philosophical
Quarterly 1998, 25(3), 403-418.
BLACKBURN,
S. Spreading the Word. Groundings in
the Philosophy of Language. Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1984. (Cap. 5: Realism and
variations.)
BOYD,
R. Scientific Realism and Naturalistic
Epistemology. In: ASQUITH & GIERE 1981 (PSA 1980 vol.2), pp. 613-662.
BOYD,
R. The Current Status of Scientific Realism.
In: LEPLIN 1984, pp. 4l-82.
Boyd, R.
(1973) “Realism, Underdetermination, and a Causal Theory of Evidence” in Noûs 7.
Boyd, R.
(1990) “Realism, Approximate Truth, and Method” in Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science v. XIV (ed Savage,
C. W.). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
BOYD, R.
Lex Orandi est Lex Credendi. In: CHURCHLAND & HOOKER 1985, pp. 3-34.
BOYD, R. On
the Current Status of the Issue of Scientific Realism. Erkenntnis 19: 45-90,
1983.
BROWN,
J.R. The Miracle of Science. The Philosophical Quarterly 32(l28): 232-244, 1982.
Bueno, Otávio (1999) O Empirismo Construtivo: uma reformulação e defesa. Campinas: Unicamp (Coleção CLE).
CARNAP, R. Meaning and Necessity. Chicago, Chicago University Press, 1947. (Suplemento A: Empiricism, semantic and ontology. Artigo traduzido para o Português in Os Pensadores, vol. 44.)
Carnap, R.
(1935) Philosophy and Logical Syntax.
London: Kegan Paul.
Carnap, R.
(1936-1937) “Testability and Meaning” in Philosophy
of Science v. 3, n. 4; v. 4, n. 1.
Carnap, R.
(1956b) “Empiricism, Semantics and Ontology” in Meaning and Necessity (Segunda Edição.). Chicago: University of
Chicago Press.
Carnap, R.
(1959) “The Elimination of Metaphysics Through Logical Analysis of Language” in
Logical Positivism (ed. Ayer, A.).
New York: Free Press.
Carnap, R.
(1963) “Carnap’s Intellectual Autobiography” in The Philosophy of Rudolf Carnap (ed. Schilpp, A.). La Salle: Open
Court.
Carnap, R.
(1984) “On the Character of Philosophic Problems” in Philosophy of Science 51.
CARNAP, R. An Introduction to the Philosophy of
Science. New York, Basic Books,
1966. (Parte 5: Theoretical laws and theoretical concepts.)
CARNAP, R.
Foundations of Logic and Mathematics. In: NEURATH et al. 1955 (F.U.S. vol 1), pp. 139-213.
CARNAP, R. The Logical Structure of the World and Pseudoproblems in Philosophy. Trad. R.A. George. Berkeley and Los Angeles, University of California Press, 1967. (L.S.W.: Parte 5, caps. C e D; P.P.: Parte 1, cap. B.) [Trad. brasileira de P.P. in Os Pensadores, vol. 44.]
CARNAP, R. The Methodological Character of Theoretical Concepts. In: FEIGL & SCRIVEN 1956 (M.S.P.S. vol. I), pp. 38-76. (Trad. brasileira in Os Pensadores, vol. 44.)
CARTWRIGHT,
N. How the Laws of Physics Lie. Oxford,
Clarendon Press, 1983.
CHALMERS, A.F. What
is this Thing Called Science? St.Lucia, University of Queensland Press,
1978.
Chihara,
Charles & Chihara, Carol (1993) “A Biological Objection to Constructive
Empiricism” in British Journal for the
Philosophy of Science 44.
CHURCHLAND,
P. M. The Ontological Status of
Observables: In Praise of Superempirical Virtues. In: CHURCHLAND & HOOKER
1985, pp. 35-47.
CHURCHLAND,
P.M. & HOOKER, C.A. (eds.) Images of Science. Chicago, University
of Chicago Press, 1985.
Churchland,
Paul (1979) Scientific Realism and the
Plasticity of Mind. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Cohen
Robert S., Realism and Anti-realism in the Philosophy of Science, Boston
Studies in the Philosophy of Science, v. 169, 1996.
CUSHING,
J.T., DELANEY, C.F. & GUTTING, G.M. (eds.) Science and Reality. Recent
Work in the Philosophy of Science. Essays in Honor of Ernan McMullin. Notre
Dame, Indiana, University of Notre Dame Press, 1984.
DAUM, A.
Schlick’s Empiricist Critical Realism. Synthese
52(3):..1982.
Day, T.,
Kincaid, H. (1994) “Putting Inference to the Best Explanation in Its Place” in Synthese 98.
Delaney,
C.I., “Pragmatic Realism and Convergence on the Truth”, Modern Schoolman LXXVI,
1999.
DESCARTES,
R. Les
Principes de la Philosophie. In: C. ADAM & P. TANNERY (eds.) Oeuvres de Descartes. Tomo IX-2. Paris, Vrin, 1971. (1a ed. latina 1644;
francesa 1647.)
DEVITT, M. Realism and Truth. Oxford, Basil
Blackwell, l984.
DUHEM, P. Salvar os
Fenômenos. Ensaio sobre a Noção de Teoria Física de Platão a Mach. Trad.
R.A. Martins. Cadernos de História e
Filosofia da Ciência. Suplemento
3, 1984.
DUMMETT, M.
Truth and Other Enigmas. London, Duckworth, l978. (Cap. 10:
Realism.)
ELLIS,
B. What Science Aims to Do. In:
CHURCHLAND & HOOKER 1985, pp. 48-74.
FEIGL,
H. The “Orthodox” View of Theories: Remarks in Defense as well
as Critique. In: RADNER & WINOKUR 1970 (M.S.P.S. vol. IV), pp. 3-16.
FEIGL, H.
& MAXWELL, G. (eds.) Scientific Explanation, Space, and Time. (Minnesota Studies in
the Philosophy of Science vol.
III.) Minneapolis, University of
Minnesota Press, 1962.
FEIGL, H.
& SCRIVEN, M. (eds.) The Foundations
of Science and the Concepts of Psychology and Psychoanalysis. (Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of
Science vol. I.) Minneapolis,
University of Minnesota Press, 1956.
Feigl, H.
(1954) “Scientific Method
without Metaphysical
Presuppositions” in Philosophical Studies
v.
FEIGL, H.,
SCRIVEN, M. & MAXWELL, G. (eds.) Concepts,
Theories and the Mind-Body Problem. (Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of
Science vol. II.) Minneapolis,
University of Minnesota Press, 1958.
Feyerabend,
P. (1963) “How to Be a Good Empiricist – A Plea for Tolerance in Matters
Epistemological” in Philosophy of Science
(ed. Baumrin, B.). New York: Interscience Publishers.
FEYERABEND,
P. K. Against Method. London, Verso, 1978. (1a ed.
1975.)
FEYERABEND,
P. K. Realism, Rationalism and Scientific
Method. (Philosophical Papers, vol. 1.) Cambridge, Cambridge University
Press, 1981.
FEYERABEND,
P. K. Science in a Free Society. London,
Verso, 197_.
FIELD, H. Realism and Relativism. The Journal of Philosophy 79:553-567, 1982. (Resenha PUTNAM 1981.)
FINE, A. The Natural Ontological Attitude.
In: LEPLIN 1984, pp. 83-107. (Também in FINE l986, cap. 7.)
FINE,
A. The
Shaky Game. Einstein, Realism and
the Quantum Theory. Chicago and London, University of Chicago Press, 1986a.
(Caps. 6 a 9.)
FINE,
A. Unnatural Attitudes: Realist and
Instrumentalist Attachments to Science. Mind
95(378): 149-179, 1986b.
Fine, A.
(2001) “The Scientific Image Twenty Years Later” in Philosophical Studies 106.
Giere, R.
(1999) Science Without Laws. Chicago:
The University of Chicago Press.
GIERE, R.N.
Constructive Realism. In: CHURCHLAND & HOOKER 1985, pp. 75-98.
Glymour, C.
(1980) Theory and Evidence.
Princeton: Princeton University Press.
GLYMOUR, C.
Conceptual Scheming, or, Confessions of a Metaphysical Realist. Synthese 51(2): 169-180, 1982.
GLYMOUR, C.
Explanation and Realism. In: LEPLIN 1984, pp. 173-192. (Também in CHURCHLAND
& HOOKER 1985, pp. 99-117.)
GRAYLING,
A.C. Realism. Cogito 1(l): 25-27,
1987.
GRIMES,
T.R. An Appraisal of van Fraassen’s
Constructive Empiricism. Philosophical
Studies 45: 261-268, 1984.
Grimes,
Thomas R., “Scientific Realism and the Problem of Underdetermination”, Protosociology
1998, 12, 238-248.
GUTTING, G.
Scientific Realism versus Constructive Empiricism: A Dialogue. In: CHURCHLAND
& HOOKER 1985, pp. 118-131.
Gutting,
G., “How to be a Scientific Realist”, Modern Schoolman LXXVI, 1999.
HACKING, I.
(ed.) Scientific Revolutions. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1981.
HACKING, I.
Do We See through a Microscope? In: CHURCHLAND & HOOKER 1985, pp. 132-152.
HACKING, I.
Experimentation and Scientific Realism. In: LEPLIN 1984, pp. 154-172.
HACKING, I.
Representing and Intervening.
Introductory Topics in the Philosophy of Natural Science. Cambridge, Cambridge
University Press, 1983.
HARDIN, C.
& ROSENBERG, A. In Defense of
Convergent Realism. Philosophy of Science
53: 31-51, 1986.
Harman, G.
(1965) “The Inference to the Best Explanation” in The Philosophical Review 74.
HEALEY, R. (ed.) Reduction, Time and Reality. Studies in the Philosophy of Natural Sciences. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1981. (Resenhado por NEILICH 1981.)
HELLMANN,
G. Realist Principles. Philosophy of Science. 50: 227-249, 1983.
HEMPEL, C.
G. Aspects of Scientific Explanation. New York, The Free Press, 1965.
HEMPEL, C.
G. Fundamentals of Concept Formation in
Empirical Science. In: NEURATH et al.
1970 (F.U.S. vol. 2), pp. 652-745. (b)
HEMPEL, C.
G. On the “Standard Conception” of Scientific Theories. In: RADNER &
WINOKUR 1970 (M.S.P.S. vol. IV), pp. 142-163. (a)
HEMPEL, C.
G. Philosophy of Natural Science. Englewood
Cliffs, Prentice Hall, 1966. (Cap. 6: Theories and theoretical explanation.)
HEMPEL, C.
G. Reduction: Ontological and Linguistic Facets. In: MORGENBESSER, SUPPES &
WHITE 1969, pp. 179-199.
Hintikka,
Jaakko, “Three Dogmas of Quine’s Empiricism”, Revue Internationale de
Philosophie, 4/1997 (202), 457-477.
HÖLLDOBLER,
B and WILSON, E. O. (1990) The Ants (Cambridge, MA, Harvard University
Press).
HOOKER, C.
A. Surface Dazzle, Ghostly Depths: An Exposition and Critical Evaluation of van
Fraassen’s Vindication of Empiricism against Realism. In: CHURCHLAND &
HOOKER 1985, pp. 153-196.
Horwich, P.
(1991) “On the Nature and Norms of Theoretical Commitment” in Philosophy of Science 58.
HORWICH, P.
Three Forms of Realism. Synthese 51(2): 181-202, 1982.
Hume, D.
(1990) Dialogues Concerning Natural
Religion (ed. Bell, M.). London: Penguin Books.
IRANZO,
V. (2000) Manipulabilidad y entidades inobservables, Theoria, 15, pp.
131-153.
Kirk,
Robert, Relativism and Reality: a Contemporary Introduction, 1999
Kosso,
P.(1998), Appereance and Reality, Oxford, University Press.
KUHN,
T. The
Structure of Scientific Revolutions. 2nd. ed. Chicago, University of Chicago
Press, 1970. (1a ed.
1962.)
Kuhn, T.
(1991), “The Road Since Structure”, In PSA 1990. Proceedings of the 1990
Biennial Meetinng of the Philosophy of Science Association, vol. 2, en A.Fine,
M. Forbes y L. Wessels (eds.). East Lansing, Michigan, Phylosophy of Science
Association.
Kukla, A.
(1995) “The Two Antirealisms of Bas van Fraassen” in Studies and History and Philosophy of Science v. 26, n. 3.
Kukla, A.
(1998), Studies in Scientific Realism, New York, Oxford, University
Press.
Ladyman,
J., Douven, I., Horsten, L., van Fraassen, B. (1997) “A Defence of Van
Fraassen’s Critique of Abductive Reasoning: Reply to Psillos” in The Philosophical Quarterly, v. 47, n.
188.
LAKATOS, I.
& MUSGRAVE, A. (eds.) Criticism and
the Growth of Knowledge. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1970.
LAUDAN,
L. A Confutation of Convergent Realism.
In: LEPLIN 1984, pp. 218-250. (a)
Laudan, L.
(1996), Beyond Positivism and Relativism, Oxford, Westview Press.
LAUDAN, L.
Explaining the Success of Science: Beyond Epistemic Realism and Realtivism. In:
CUSHING et al. 1984, pp. 83-105. (b).
Launer,
Henri, “Truth and Reference”, Revue Internationale de Philosophie, 1997,
51(202), 557-566.
LAYMON,
R. The Path from Data to Theory. In:
LEPLIN 1984, pp. 108-123.
LEPLIN,
J. Methodological Realism and
Scientific Rationality. Philosophy of
Science 53: 31-51, 1986.
LEPLIN,
J. Truth and Scientific Progress. In:
LEPLIN 1984, pp. 193-217.
Leplin, J.
(1997) A Novel Defense of Scientific
Realism. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
LEPLIN, J.
(ed.) Scientific Realism. Berkeley
and Los Angeles, University of California Press, 1984.
Levin, G. Realism
and Representation, University of Woisconsin Press, 1993
LEVIN,
M. What Kind of Explanation Is Truth?
In: LEPLIN 1984, pp. 124-139.
Lipton, P.
(1991) Inference to the Best Explanation.
London: Routledge.
Lipton, P.
(1993) “Is the Best Good Enough?” in Proceedings
of the Aristotelian Society v. XCIII, part 2.
LOPARIC, Z. Andreas Osiander: Prefácio ao De Revolutionibus Orbium Coelestium de Copérnico. Cadernos de História e Filosofia da Ciência, 1: 44-6l, 1980.
LUNTLEY, M.
Verification, Perception and Theoretical Entities. The Philosophical Quarterly 32(128):
245-261, 1982.
Mandelbaum,
M. (1964) Philosophy, Science and Sense
Perception. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press.
Matthews,
M. (1994) Science Teaching. London:
Routledge.
MAXWELL,
G. (1962) The ontological status of
theoretical entities, in: H. FEIGL and G. MAXWELL (Eds.) Scientific Explanation, Space and Time
(Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, vol. III) (Minneapolis,
University of Minnesota Press), pp. 3-27.
MAXWELL,
G. The Ontological Status of
Theoretical Entities. In: FEIGL & MAXWELL 1962 (M.S.P.S. vol. III), pp.
3-27.
MAXWELL, G.
Structural Realism and the Meaning of Theoretical Terms. In: FEIGL &
MAXWELL 1962 (M.S.P.S. vol. III), pp. 181-192.
Mc Dowell,
J. (1998), Meaning, Knowledge and Reality, Massachusetts, Harvard
University Press.
McGINN,
C. Realist Semantics and Content
Ascription. Synthese 52(1):..., 1982.
McGowan,
Mary Kate, “The Metaphysics of Squaring Scientific Realism with Referential
Indeterminancy”, Erkenntnis, 1999, 50 (1), 87-94.
McMICHAEL,
A. Van Fraassen’s Instrumentalism. The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 36: 257-272, 1985.
McMULLIN,
E. A Case for Scientific Realism. In:
LEPLIN 1984, pp.8-4O.
Misak,
Cheryl, “How Not to Think of Convergence on the Truth”, The Modern Schoolman,
LXXVI, 1999,
MORGENBESSER,
S., SUPPES, P. & WHITE, M. (eds.) Philosophy,
Science and Method. Essays in Honor of Ernest Nagel. New York, St. Martin
Press, 1969.
MORRISON,
M. (1990) Theory, intervention and realism, Synthese, 82, pp. 1-22.
Moser, P.,
Mulder, D., Trout, J.D. (1998) The Theory
of Knowledge. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Mounce,
H.O. (1999) Hume´s Naturalism.
London: Routledge.
Musgrave,
A. Common Sense, Science and Scepticism, Cambridge University Press,
1993
MUSGRAVE,
A. Constuctive Empiricism versus Scientific Realism. The Philosophical Quarterly 32(128):
262-271, 1982. (Estudo crítico de VAN FRAASSEN 1980.)
MUSGRAVE,
A. Realism versus Constructive Empiricism. In: CHURCHLAND & HOOKER 1985,
pp. 197-221.
NAGEL, E. The
Structure of Science. London, Routledge and Kegan Paul, 196l. (Cap. 5:
Experimental laws and theories; cap. 6: The cognitive status of theories.)
NERLICH, G. The Present State of Realism. The Philosophical Quarterly 32(128): 272-279, 1982. (Estudo crítico de HEALEY 1981.)
NEURATH, O., CARNAP, R. & MORRIS, C. (eds.) Foundations of the Unity of Science. Toward an International Encyclopedia of
Unified Science. Vol. 1. Chicago and London, University of Chicago Press, 1955.
NEURATH,
O., CARNAP, R. & MORRIS, C. (eds.). Idem, Vol. 2, 1970.
NEWTON-SMITH,
W.H. The Rationality of Science. London, Routledge and Kegan Paul,
198l. (Cap. 2: Observation, theory and truth.)
Newton-Smith,
W.H. (1985) “Berkeley’s Philosophy of Science” in Essays on Berkeley (ed. Foster, J. & Robinson, H.). Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Niiniluoto,
Ilkka, “Reference Invariance and Truthlikeness”, Philosophy of Science 1997,
64 (4), 546-554.
Nola, R.-
Sankey, H. After Popper, Kuhn and Feyerabend, Kluwer Academic Publisher,
2000.
Nola,
Robert (2003), Rescuing Reason. A Critique of Anti-Rationalist Views of
Science and Knowledge, Dept. of Philosophy, University of Auckland, New
Zealand. Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 230.
Orenstein,
A., “Arguing from Inescrutability of Reference to Indeterminancy of Meaning”, Revue
Internationale de Philosophie, 1997, 51(202), 507-519.
PEARCE, D.
& RENTALA, V. Realism and Formal
Semantics. Synthese 52(1):...., 1982.
PEARCE, D.
& RENTALA, V. Realism and Reference: Some Comments on Putnam. Synthese
52(3):...., 1982.
POLAKOV, A.
The Inconsistency of Putnam’s Internal Realism. Manuscrito, 12 (l):
39-53, 1989.
POPPER, K.
R. Conjectures and Refutations. 4. ed., revista. London, Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1972a. (Cap. 3: Three views
concerning human knowledge.)
POPPER, K.
R. Objective Knowledge. Oxford,
Clarendon Press, 1972b.
POPPER, K.
R. Realism and the Aim of Science. London,
Hutchinson, l983.
POPPER, K.
R. The Logic of Scientific Discovery. Ed. revista. London, Hutchinson, 1968. (1a
ed. 1959.)
Psillos, S.
(1996) “On Van Fraassen’s Critique of Abductive Reasoning” in The Philosophical
Quarterly, v. 46, n. 182.
Psillos, S.
(1997) “How not to Defend Constructive Empiricism: A Rejoinder” in The Philosophical Quarterly, v. 47, n.
188.
Psillos, S.
(1999), Scientific Realism. How Science Tracks Truth, London and New
York, Roudledge.
Psillos, S.
(2000) “The Present State of the Scientific Realism Debate” in British Journal for the Philosophy of
Science 51.
Psillos, S.
(2001) “Predictive Similarity and the Success of Science: A Reply to Stanford”
in Philosophy of Science 68.
Psillos,
Stathis, “Naturalism without Truth?”, Studies in History and Philosophy of
Science 1997, 28 (4), 699-713.
Psillos,
Stathis, “Scientific Realism and the Pessimistic Induction”, Proceedings of
the Biennial Meetings of the Philosophy of Science Association 1996, 3
(suppl), S 306-314.
Puntel, L.,
“On the Logical Positivist’s Theory of Truth: the Fundamental Problem an a New
Perspective”,
PUTNAM, H. Mind, Language and Reality. (Philosophical Papers, vol.
2.) Cambridge, Cambridge University
Press, l975. (Cap. 3: Do true assertions correspond to reality?)
PUTNAM, H. Three Kinds of Scientific Realism. The Philosophical Quarterly 32(128): 195-200, 1982.
PUTNAM, H.
(1975) What is mathematical truth?, in: H. PUTNAM Mathematics, Matter and Method (Philosophical Papers, vol.
I) (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press), pp. 60-78.
Putnam, H.
(1999) The Threefold Cord: Mind, Body, and World, New York, Columbia
University Press.
PUTNAM, H. Meaning and the Moral Sciences. London,
Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1978. (Parte 1, Lecture II; Parte 4.)
PUTNAM, H. Realism and Reason. (Philosophical
Papers, vol. 3.) Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1983. (Cap. 4:
Reference and truth.)
PUTNAM, H. Realism, Truth and History. Cambridge,
Cambridge University Press, l98l.
PUTNAM, H. What Is Realism? In: LEPLIN 1984, pp. 140-153. (Também in PUTNAM 1978, Parte 1, Lecture II.)
Quine, W.
(1960) Word and Object. Cambridge:
MIT Press.
Quine, W. (1980) “Sobre o que Há” in Os Pensadores. São Paulo: Abril Cultural.
Quine, W.
(1981) “Five Milestones of Empiricism” in
Theories and Things. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Quine, W.
(1987) “Epistemology Naturalized” in Naturalizing
Epistemology (ed. Kornblith, H). Cambridge: MIT Press.
QUINTON, A.
(1964) Matter and space, Mind, 73, pp. 332-352.
QUINTON, A.
(1973) The Nature of Things (London, Routledge and Kegan Paul).
RADNER, M.
& WINOKUR, S. (eds.) Analysis of Theories and Methods of Physics
and Psychology. (Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science vol. IV.) Minneapolis, University of
Minnesota Press, 1970.
RASMUSSEN,
S.A. Sense, Reference and
Meaning-Incommensurability. (Analysis ...170-173)
RASMUSSEN,
S.A. & RAVNKILDE, J. Realism and
Logic. Synthese 52(3):...,1982.
Reichenbach,
H. (1938) Experience and Prediction.
Chicago: Chicago University Press.
Reichenbach,
H. (1960) “Are There Atoms? “ in The
Structure of Scientific Thought (ed. Madden, E.). London: Routledge.
REINER, R.
and PIERSON, R. (1995) Hacking’s experimental realism: An untenable middle
ground, Philosophy of Science, 62, pp. 60-69.
RESNICK, D.
B. (1994) Hacking’s experimental realism, Canadian Journal of Philosophy,
24, pp. 395-412.
Rorty, R.
(1991) “Objectivism, Relativism and Truth” in Philosophical Papers, vol. 1. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Rorty, R.
(1994) Philosophy and the Mirror of
Nature. Oxford: Blackwell.
Rosen, G.
(1994) “What is Constructive Empiricism?” in Philosophical Studies 74.
Rouse,
Joseph, “Should We Ask the Question that Scientific Realism would Answer?”, Modern
Schoolman 1999, 76 (2-3), pp. 121-124.
ROZENBOOM,
W.W. The Factual Content of Theoretical
Concepts. In: FEIGL & MAXWELL 1962 (M.S.P.S. vol. III), pp. 273-357.
Salmon, W,
“The Spirit of Logical Empiricism: Carl G. Hempel’s Role in Twentieth-Century
Philosophy of Science”, Philosophy of Science 66, 1999. 333-350.
SALMON,
W. Scientific
Explanation and the Causal Structure of the World. Princeton, Princeton
University Press, 1984. (Cap. 8: Theoretical explanation.)
Salmon, W.-
Wolters, G.(ed) Logic, Language and the Structure of Scientific Theories,
Pittsburgh University of Pittsburgh Press, 1994.
Sankey, H.
(1997), Rationality, Relativism and Incommensurability, Avebury Series
in Philosophy of Science, Ashgate Publishing Company, Brookfield.
Sankey,
Howard, “Feyerabend and Description Theory of Reference”, Journal of
Philosophical Research, 1991, 16, pp. 223-232.
SCHLAGEL,
R. H. (1988) Experimental realism: a critique of van Fraassen’s “constructive
empiricism”, Review of Metaphysics, 41, pp. 789-814.
Schlesinger,
George, N., “Properties, Underdetermination, Scientific Realism”, Protosociology
1998, 12, 212-224.
SCHLICK,
M. Positivism and Realism. Trad. D. Rynin. In: AYER 1959, pp. 82-107.
(Trad. brasilleira in Os Pensadores, vol. 44.)
SCHLICK,
M. The Foundations of Knowledge. Trad. D. Rynin. In: AYER 1959, pp. 209-227. (Trad. brasileira in Os
Pensadores, vol. 44.)
SEAGER, W.
(1995) Ground truth and virtual reality: Hacking vs. van Fraassen, Philosophy
of Science, 62, pp. 451-478.
SINTONEN,
M. Realism and Understanding. Synthese 52(3):..., 1982.
SMART, J.
J. C. Between Science and Philosophy. New
York, Ramdom House, 1968.
SMART, J.
J. C. Philosophy of Science and Realism.
London, Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1963.
SMART, J.
J. C. Realism vs. Idealism. Philosophy
61: 295-312, 1986.
Smart,
J.J.C. (1985) “Laws of Nature and Cosmic Coincidences” in The Philosophical Quarterly v. 35, n. 140.
Smith, P.
(1981) Realism and the Progress of
Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. (Resenhado por A. Morton, The Phil. Quart. 32(128): 288-289, 1982.)
SNEED, J.D.
Structuralism and Scientific Realism. Erkenntnis
19:345-370, 1983.
Sosa, E. y
KIM, J. (2000), Epistemology, Massachusetts, Blackwell.
Suppe, F.
(1993) “What’s Wrong With the Received View on the Structure of Scientific
Theories?” in Foundations of Philosophy
of Science: Recent Developments (ed. Fetzer, J.H.) New York: Paragon House.
SUPPE, F. The Structure of Scientific Theories.
2nd. ed. Urbana, Chicago and London, University of Illinois Press, 1977.
Szubka,
Tadeusz, “Realism, Holism and Self-Justification”, Indian Philosophical
Quarterly 25(2), 1998, 227-240
Teller, P.
(2001) “Whither Constructive Empiricism?” in Philosophical Studies 106.
Thagard, P.
(1978) “The Best Explanation: Criteria for Theory Choice” in The Journal of Philosophy v. LXXV, n. 2.
Thagard, P.
(1990) “The Conceptual Structure of the Chemical Revolution” in Philosophy of Science 57.
Thagard,
P. (1992) Conceptual Revolutions.
Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Torretti,
R., “Scientific Realism and Scientific Practice”, Theoria, 1996, 11
926), 29-43.
Van
Fraassen, B. (1994a) “Against Transcendental Empiricism” in The Questions of Hermeneutics (ed. Staplenton, T.J.). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Van
Fraassen, B. (1994b) “Gideon Rosen on Constructive Empiricism” in Philosophical Studies 74.
Van
Fraassen, B. (1995) “ ‘World’ Is Not a Count Noun” in Nôus v. 29, n. 2.
Van
Fraassen, B. (2000) “The False Hopes of Traditional Epistemology” in Philosophy and Phenomenological Research,
v. LX, n. 2.
Van
Fraassen, B. (2001) “Constructive Empiricism Now” in Philosophical Studies 106.
Van
Fraassen, B. (2002) The Empirical Stance.
New Haven: Yale University Press.
Van
Fraassen, B. C. (1989), Laws and Symmetry, Oxford, Clarendom Press.
VAN
FRAASSEN, B. C. Empiricism in the Philosophy of Science. In: CHURCHLAND &
HOOKER 1985, pp. 245-308.
VAN
FRAASSEN, B. C. The Charibdis of Realism: Epistemological Implications of
Bell’s Inequality. Synthese 52: 25-38, 1982.
VAN
FRAASSEN, B. C. The Scientific Image.
Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1980.
VAN
FRAASSEN, B. C. Theory Construction and Experiment: An Empiricist View. In:
ASQUITH & GIERE 1981 (PSA 1980 vol. 2), pp. 663-677.
VAN
FRAASSEN, B. C. To Save the Phenomena. In: LEPLIN 1984, pp. 250-259.
Vollmer, S.
(2000) “Two Kinds of Observation: Why van Fraassen Was Right to Make a
Distinction, but Made the Wrong One” in Philosophy
of Science 67.
Wilson, M.
(1985) “Berkeley and the Corpuscularians” in Essays on Berkeley (ed. Foster, J. & Robinson, H.). Oxford: Clarendon Press.
WILSON, M.
What Can Theory Tell Us about Observation? In: CHURCHLAND & HOOKER 1985,
pp. 222-242.
WORRALL,
J. Scientific Realism and Scientific
Change. The Philosophical Quarterly 32(128): 201-231.