Kuhn vs. Popper
Fuller uses the 1965 meeting between Thomas Kuhn and Karl Popper, in which they discussed the philosophy of science, as a point of departure to discuss how their respective philosophies have been received by the media, the public, and scholars.
Rupert Read called the book worthless, and wrote that it presented an over-simplified and distorted view of both Popper and Kuhn. The Economist wrote that the book was not thorough enough to be convincing. The mass circulation US magazine Popular Science made the book Book of the Month in February 2005. A UK-based on-line site, also called 'Popular Science' but bearing no relation to the magazine, called the book meaningless babble.
- Read, Rupert (Sept 2005 v35 i3 p369-387). "Book Review: How and How Not to Write on a "Legendary" Philosopher". Philosophy of the Social Sciences. Retrieved 2008-10-10. Check date values in:
- "Book Review: Kuhn vs. Popper". The Economist. Aug 7, 2003. Retrieved 2008-10-10.
- "Book Review: Kuhn vs. Popper". Popular Science. February 1, 2005, volume 266, issue 2, page 89. Retrieved 2008-10-10. Check date values in:
- Choice July–August 2005 volume 42 i11-12 p1999
- Kirkus November 15, 2004, volume 72, issue 22, p1078
- New Scientist September 6, 2003, volume 179, issue 2411, page 48
- Philosophy of the Social Sciences, Rupert Read Sept 2005 v35 i3 p369-387
- Popular Science February 1, 2005, volume 266, issue 2, page 89
- The Economist (US) August 9, 2003, volume 368, i8336, page 71
|This article about a science book is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it.|