2 clarified the name of the book being recommended
source | link

ThisUnderstanding Philosophy of Science, by James Ladyman was the first text set to me (over a decade ago) for HPS, History and Philosophy of Science (no prior philosophy classes):

Few can imagine a world without telephones or televisions; many depend on computers and the Internet as part of daily life. Without scientific theory, these developments would not have been possible.

In this exceptionally clear and engaging introduction to philosophy of science, James Ladyman explores the philosophical questions that arise when we reflect on the nature of the scientific method and the knowledge it produces. He discusses whether fundamental philosophical questions about knowledge and reality might be answered by science, and considers in detail the debate between realists and antirealists about the extent of scientific knowledge. Along the way, central topics in philosophy of science, such as the demarcation of science from non-science, induction, confirmation and falsification, the relationship between theory and observation and relativism are all addressed. Important and complex current debates over underdetermination, inference to the best explaination and the implications of radical theory change are clarified and clearly explained for those new to the subject.

It annoyed me at the time, partly because I couldn't take it seriously due to the (it seemed) inane dialogue pages, between two philosophy students. But I would recommend it for philosophy of science (which I reckon is where 'it' is really at).

This was the first text set to me (over a decade ago) for HPS, History and Philosophy of Science (no prior philosophy classes):

Few can imagine a world without telephones or televisions; many depend on computers and the Internet as part of daily life. Without scientific theory, these developments would not have been possible.

In this exceptionally clear and engaging introduction to philosophy of science, James Ladyman explores the philosophical questions that arise when we reflect on the nature of the scientific method and the knowledge it produces. He discusses whether fundamental philosophical questions about knowledge and reality might be answered by science, and considers in detail the debate between realists and antirealists about the extent of scientific knowledge. Along the way, central topics in philosophy of science, such as the demarcation of science from non-science, induction, confirmation and falsification, the relationship between theory and observation and relativism are all addressed. Important and complex current debates over underdetermination, inference to the best explaination and the implications of radical theory change are clarified and clearly explained for those new to the subject.

It annoyed me at the time, partly because I couldn't take it seriously due to the (it seemed) inane dialogue pages, between two philosophy students. But I would recommend it for philosophy of science (which I reckon is where 'it' is really at).

Understanding Philosophy of Science, by James Ladyman was the first text set to me (over a decade ago) for HPS, History and Philosophy of Science (no prior philosophy classes):

Few can imagine a world without telephones or televisions; many depend on computers and the Internet as part of daily life. Without scientific theory, these developments would not have been possible.

In this exceptionally clear and engaging introduction to philosophy of science, James Ladyman explores the philosophical questions that arise when we reflect on the nature of the scientific method and the knowledge it produces. He discusses whether fundamental philosophical questions about knowledge and reality might be answered by science, and considers in detail the debate between realists and antirealists about the extent of scientific knowledge. Along the way, central topics in philosophy of science, such as the demarcation of science from non-science, induction, confirmation and falsification, the relationship between theory and observation and relativism are all addressed. Important and complex current debates over underdetermination, inference to the best explaination and the implications of radical theory change are clarified and clearly explained for those new to the subject.

It annoyed me at the time, partly because I couldn't take it seriously due to the (it seemed) inane dialogue pages, between two philosophy students. But I would recommend it for philosophy of science (which I reckon is where 'it' is really at).

1
source | link

This was the first text set to me (over a decade ago) for HPS, History and Philosophy of Science (no prior philosophy classes):

Few can imagine a world without telephones or televisions; many depend on computers and the Internet as part of daily life. Without scientific theory, these developments would not have been possible.

In this exceptionally clear and engaging introduction to philosophy of science, James Ladyman explores the philosophical questions that arise when we reflect on the nature of the scientific method and the knowledge it produces. He discusses whether fundamental philosophical questions about knowledge and reality might be answered by science, and considers in detail the debate between realists and antirealists about the extent of scientific knowledge. Along the way, central topics in philosophy of science, such as the demarcation of science from non-science, induction, confirmation and falsification, the relationship between theory and observation and relativism are all addressed. Important and complex current debates over underdetermination, inference to the best explaination and the implications of radical theory change are clarified and clearly explained for those new to the subject.

It annoyed me at the time, partly because I couldn't take it seriously due to the (it seemed) inane dialogue pages, between two philosophy students. But I would recommend it for philosophy of science (which I reckon is where 'it' is really at).