Page History

SCANNED PDF

Wiki MarkupNygren argues that "\[w\]e can only speak of science where there is a possibility of objective argumentation." In the sciences, he insists, "it is not enough simply to postulate and assert. We demand reasons for the assertion" (219).

But granting that the possibility of some form or mode of objective argumentation is indeed a necessary condition of the possibility of speaking of science, I question whether it is also a sufficient condition---as it seems to me Nygren either supposes or fails to make clear that he does not suppose (cf., e.g., 120). In fact, I should want to hold that it is not a sufficient condition of the possibility of speaking of science, but only of critical reflection and proper theory.

...