科哲读后感（Kezhe.）.docVIP

科哲读后感（Kezhe.） 1, though, I was the most capable scientist practitioner engaged in science, and does not require the philosophers suggestion, however, is not particularly good at scientists described and characterized in that kind of work out of their work. Scientists are usually very good at promoting scientific progress, but they are not particularly good at explaining what constitutes that progress. The first ten chapters of the book are criticized and summed up the traditional positivism doctrine, the most influential of the last century, following the Popper and Kuhn Lakatos and Feyerabend six kinds of attempts to explain the nature of science theory, reading is full of intelligence gobble down feeling, masochistic pleasure. In the eleventh chapter, the author puts forward his own golden mean. Reflect the philosophy of science progress and continue to write new increasing criticism after the five chapter the author can not fully control the feeling, perhaps because of the limited space and the audiences perception, if the author before his death will be updated edition, hope to see more color paper. In addition, because the author is the physics background, all arguments are based on physics as an example, the paper discusses the word science Rolex into only seven or eight, even in a context can only refer to physics. In a word, its enough. If you think you already know what science is, you must not know what science is. The book does not intend to contribute to science, nor does it even intend to contribute to the physics I focus on. On the contrary, to a great extent, I tried to clarify what physics is or has been through historical examples. 2, knowledge produced in social science itself constitutes an important part of the system under study. Thus, for example, economic theory can influence the way individuals move in the marketplace, so that changes in theory can lead to some change in the economic system under study. This concurrency phenomenon is not appl