SSOAR Logo
    • Deutsch
    • English
  • English 
    • Deutsch
    • English
  • Login
SSOAR ▼
  • Home
  • About SSOAR
  • Guidelines
  • Publishing in SSOAR
  • Cooperating with SSOAR
    • Cooperation models
    • Delivery routes and formats
    • Projects
  • Cooperation partners
    • Information about cooperation partners
  • Information
    • Possibilities of taking the Green Road
    • Grant of Licences
    • Download additional information
  • Operational concept
Browse and search Add new document OAI-PMH interface
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

Download PDF
Download full text

(707.1Kb)

Citation Suggestion

Please use the following Persistent Identifier (PID) to cite this document:
https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:0168-ssoar-60027-0

Exports for your reference manager

Bibtex export
Endnote export

Display Statistics
Share
  • Share via E-Mail E-Mail
  • Share via Facebook Facebook
  • Share via Bluesky Bluesky
  • Share via Reddit reddit
  • Share via Linkedin LinkedIn
  • Share via XING XING

Reichenbach: el empirismo se quedó sin inducción

[journal article]

Maldonado-Veloza, Fabio

Abstract

Ser empirista consecuente significa tomar como base del conocimiento la experiencia, y si el empirista propone la inducción como método para conocer, entonces tiene que abandonar su "exceso" de experiencia y su empirismo radical. Esto se debe a que la inducción es un método no analítico que no puede... view more

Ser empirista consecuente significa tomar como base del conocimiento la experiencia, y si el empirista propone la inducción como método para conocer, entonces tiene que abandonar su "exceso" de experiencia y su empirismo radical. Esto se debe a que la inducción es un método no analítico que no puede ser considerado como un producto de la experiencia y, si no se basa en ella, entonces no es correcto afirmar que ésta sea la fuente exclusiva del conocimiento. De ahí su dilema: si admite el principio inductivo, debe abandonar su empirismo radical; si defiende su empirismo radical, debe abandonar el principio inductivo. Reichenbach aseveró que el abandono de la inducción por parte del empirista conduce a la aceptación de la imposibilidad de predicción. Por lo tanto, se le están poniendo límites al conocimiento y esto puede conducirnos al agnosticismo. En todo caso, Reichenbach no compartió el "quietismo" de Hume. La solución de Hume no fue correcta; fue psicológica, y si el problema de la inducción continuaba intacto, Reichenbach propuso aceptar la solución incorrecta de Hume y averiguar más bien si se trata de un buen o un mal hábito. Propuso utilizarla para validar teorías. Es decir, asoció la inducción al contexto de la validación. El autor propone que tal salida sigue siendo psicológica: se sigue huyendo del problema lógico para no renunciar a la inducción.... view less


For a true empiricist, knowledge can only be derived from experience. If an empiricist were to propose induction as a method for apprehending, then the experience "excess" of radical empiricism would be forsaken. This because induction is a non-analytic method that cannot be considered as a yield of... view more

For a true empiricist, knowledge can only be derived from experience. If an empiricist were to propose induction as a method for apprehending, then the experience "excess" of radical empiricism would be forsaken. This because induction is a non-analytic method that cannot be considered as a yield of sense experience, and if not based on experience, it would then be incorrect to advócate experience as the solé source of knowledge. Thus the dilemma of the radical empiricist: if the principie of induction is acknowledged, radical empiricism is abjured; if radical empiricism is upheld, then the principie of induction needs be abandoned. Reichenbach argued that by forsaking induction the empiricist must then accept prediction as impossible, thereby limiting knowledge and enticing agnosticism. In any case, Reichenbach did not acquiesce to Hume's "quietism". Hume’s solution was not corred, it was psychologycal; wherefore the question of induction remained unaffected. Thus Reichenbach propounded to accept Hume's incorrect solution at that, and in any case inquire whether induction was a good or a bad habit. Reichenbach's proposal was to use induction to valídate theories, that is, he linked induction to the realm of validation. The author contends that this other solution is still psychological, and that the logical problem is being eluded in order not to relinquish induction.... view less

Classification
Philosophy, Ethics, Religion
Sociology of Knowledge

Document language
Spanish

Publication Year
1997

Page/Pages
p. 11-34

Journal
Revista Mexicana de Ciencias Políticas y Sociales, 41 (1997) 167

DOI
https://doi.org/10.22201/fcpys.2448492xe.1997.167.49422

ISSN
2448-492X

Status
Published Version; peer reviewed

Licence
Creative Commons - Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0


GESIS LogoDFG LogoOpen Access Logo
Home  |  Legal notices  |  Operational concept  |  Privacy policy
© 2007 - 2025 Social Science Open Access Repository (SSOAR).
Based on DSpace, Copyright (c) 2002-2022, DuraSpace. All rights reserved.
 

 


GESIS LogoDFG LogoOpen Access Logo
Home  |  Legal notices  |  Operational concept  |  Privacy policy
© 2007 - 2025 Social Science Open Access Repository (SSOAR).
Based on DSpace, Copyright (c) 2002-2022, DuraSpace. All rights reserved.