Understanding Philosophy of Science

James Ladyman's book is an excellent introduction to philosophy of science, though at times (especially in the latter part of the book) it becomes too sophisticated for a lower division course. Still, Ladyman covers the basics and then some using a clear style that engages the reader, bringing her gradually closer to some deep questions about the nature of science. The book starts with the standard topics of induction (and the corresponding problem pointed out by David Hume), moving to Popper's falsificationism, originally proposed as a solution to the problem of justification of inductive inference. After having explained why falsificationism in turn didn't work very well, Ladyman proceeds to Kuhn and the idea of paradigm shifts in the history of science. The difficult part comes in the second section, which is entirely devoted to the still ongoing debate between realists and antirealists in science. The reader is slowly but surely walked through increasingly complex rebuttals and counter-rebuttals articulated by major players in this high-level intellectual dispute, encountering fundamental concepts in modern philosophy of science throughout the ride. We learn about the underdetermination of theories by data, inference to the best explanation, constructive empiricism, the Duhem-Quine thesis and theories of explanation. The reader never gets to a final answer, which of course is not the point, but with a bit of effort it should be possible to follow Ladyman all the way to the end. The last two short sections, on idealisation and structural realism, are a bit too short to be effective; they should be either cut out or expanded in future editions. Still, I'm planning to use this book next semester in a 300-level class on philosophy of science, and I'm looking forward to the puzzled reactions of my students when they'll begin to appreciate how little we understand about how science works.

I liked Ladyman's book. The clarity of its chapters are worth the price. Not many books written for the purpose of introducing the reader to a complex subject matter succeed in their task. This one does. Those that expect it to be a definitive treatment of whatever subject it touches on are reading it wrongly. Ladyman brings the reader through the foggy marshes of Bas van Fraasen's anti-realism, Putnam's 'no-miracles' argument, Hume's hang ups with induction, and Lipton's love for 'lovely' explanations being guides to likely explanations. The chapters come in at a reasonable length, and end with a helpful 'further reading' section anyone with a good library can use to their advantage. Much of the book is dedicated to the realist v. anti-realist problem, but that is a key problem in philosophy of science. Those who have their minds made up about this ought to look elsewhere, but that does not detract from the value of reading this clearly written book.

Excellent book! I bought it for a Philosophy class and it has not disappointed me.

This is not a book for leisure, but it makes an excellent textbook for an introduction course on philosophy of science. In a nutshell, Ladyman can be a bit wordy, but this book accomplishes its goal of making philosophy of science easier to understand without simplifying anything. If I were a professor teaching a course of philosophy of science, I would definitely make this a required text.

Very nice introductory text. Use it to prepare my classes in the medical school.

I had to get this book for a class. I gave it two stars rather than one because there were a handful of great sections, including those about Popper and Khuntz. However, some of the more conceptual sections (the problem of symmetry argument against the covering law model) left me scratching my head. Ladyman seriously misses the mark on demonstrating the significance of most of the concepts in what feels like a scramble to cover a certain body of topics.

I'm taking philosophy of science and at times, this book is very confusing. I wish he would define every term specifically and then go into explanations and examples. When he did do this, I had no problem understanding what I was reading. Maybe it's because this is my first philosophy course and I'm a social sciences major with minimal science classes. Who knows, but my overall impression of this book is that there's probably a better one out there that would allow you to understand philosophy of science a lot more.

Excellent introduction to philosophy of science

I did a degree in Philosophy 40 years ago when education was free. (In fact we got paid to study!) I am now retired and wanted to stir up the grey cells. A lecturer in Philosophy recommended this book as a good re-introduction to metaphysics. I read it alongside Stephen Hawking's Brief history of time and Carlo Rovelli's Seven brief lessons on physics, with a biography of Stalin thrown in for light relief. Understanding PofS is a slog for those who are new to the subject. It covers a lot of ground and will leave you without an answer - but that is normal for philosophy because the object of the exercise is to think. Unfortunately, Hawking and Rovelli did not help my confusion. The conclusion I drew from all three books was that we don't really have much of an idea how the world works, and PofS seems to question whether we ever will have/should have. The table in front of me is no longer a solid brown object. It is not even a collection of tiny particles in vast amounts of space because the particles might only be energy. The forces which hold everything together don't work together on a macro and micro scale and Heisenberg isn't even sure that they are where we think they are. I am tending towards an anti-realist or Berkleyan view of the "world" and although I don't believe in a Creator, the Big Bang theory is equally mythical. Perhaps everything is just a figment of my deranged imagination after all. Bibo ergo sum

Nice presentation of the topic.

Excellent reference to the Philosophy of Science. I reckon’ an updated version that includes more detail on models and measurement would be in order.

Good product got it for uni

Excellent, I have learnt a lot from reading the book. It is well written and suitable for the beginner and expert alike :)