The Structure of Science

Nagel, E. (1961). The Structure of Science: Problems in the Logic of Scientific Explanation. Harcourt, Brace.

Type

Book

Intellectual base

Review or monograph

Year

1961

Link

https://archive.org/details/structureofscien0000nage

Cited from

marine_science, physics

Cited by

2 citations across 2 artifacts.

Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.

Primes

• Correspondence Principle
  • The correspondence principle operates effectively regardless of which interpretation is correct, but it does not settle the metaphysical question.

    This sourceCanonical statement of inter-theoretic reduction (derivation of a higher-level theory from a lower one) and the reduction-vs-emergence debate; supports the heuristic-vs-ontological / reductionism-vs-emergence framing of T6 (D13-109).

• Reductionism
  • The essential commitment is upward determination plus explanatory sufficiency: understand the parts and their composition, and nothing about the whole is left unexplained.

    This sourceHarcourt, Brace & World. Classic statement of reduction as upward determination plus explanatory sufficiency, formalizing inter-theoretic reduction (the derivation of a higher-level theory from a lower one) and framing the question of where explanation bottoms out.

Verification

Does it exist? Not checked yet. This entry carries no identifier to resolve. It was extracted from the citation as written in the article, normalized, and deduplicated against the rest of the registry.

Does it back the claim? Not recorded. Neither this nor any other of the 2 citations of this work carries a recorded support check.

Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.

See how references were verified.

Registry ID ref:d68912bb7709 · see in the full table