Dear Colleagues,

In his book Probability Theory: The Logic of Science, E.T. Jaynes developed the compelling thesis that probability theory constituted an overarching logical framework applicable to all known sciences at the time, ranging from physics to sociology. From the point of view of the philosophy of science, one may take issue with the take-home message, i.e., probability theory as the only logic of science. Firstly, one may ask how this view fares compared to the understanding of science developed by the philosophical tradition initiated by T. Kuhn and his successors. Second, is “probability theory as the logic of science” to be understood as a prescriptive or descriptive claim? If the proposition is to be prescriptive, on what grounds can one support, or instead challenge, this prescription? If, however, it is to be descriptive, is it supported by the contemporary practice of science or by historical accounts? Third, one may note that probability theory itself refers to propositional logic: a probabilistic proposition can be true or false. Furthermore, logic itself can be construed as a science; does this mean that probability theory can explain itself? Fourth, even if probability theory were to be common (by prescription or description) to all scientific disciplines at the stages where inferences are needed, it remains that many successful theories are not framed in a probabilistic manner and usually rest on a logic of a different kind, closer to first-order logic in nature. Within this more focused context, what can be said about the logic of individual theories? For example, is the logic of General Relativity comparable to the logic of, say, Reaction Kinetics? More generally, is there any logical “thread” (e.g., entailment) relating one theory (or even a discipline) to another? Finally, when assessing the virtues of an individual scientific theory, are there any identifiable logical constraints (e.g., self-consistency is a commonly advocated one) that it must satisfy for it to be taken seriously or widely accepted by the corresponding scientific community?

By addressing the aforementioned concerns or related questions, this Special Issue of Philosophies aims to bring together logic and philosophy of science in an original and contemporary light.

Dr. Fabien Paillusson
Guest Editor

Manuscript Submission Information

Manuscripts should be submitted online at www.mdpi.com by registering and logging in to this website. Once you are registered, click here to go to the submission form. Manuscripts can be submitted until the deadline. All submissions that pass pre-check are peer-reviewed. Accepted papers will be published continuously in the journal (as soon as accepted) and will be listed together on the special issue website. Research articles, review articles as well as short communications are invited. For planned papers, a title and short abstract (about 100 words) can be sent to the Editorial Office for announcement on this website.

Submitted manuscripts should not have been published previously, nor be under consideration for publication elsewhere (except conference proceedings papers). All manuscripts are thoroughly refereed through a double-blind peer-review process. A guide for authors and other relevant information for submission of manuscripts is available on the Instructions for Authors page. Philosophies is an international peer-reviewed open access semimonthly journal published by MDPI.

Please visit the Instructions for Authors page before submitting a manuscript. The Article Processing Charge (APC) for publication in this open access journal is 1400 CHF (Swiss Francs). Submitted papers should be well formatted and use good English. Authors may use MDPI's English editing service prior to publication or during author revisions.

• Science
• Epistemology
• Logic
• Probability
• Bayesianism
• Supervenience
• Theory
• Metaphysics
• Emergence