Hey. So I don't know where else to turn. I have an essay due next tuesday on this question. I was just assigned it this tuesday. I have no resources. We don't have a text for the class, and I've been to every class taking notes, so it's not like I've been slacking off, but I don't think the professor has given us enough information to answer this question, and can't find information anywhere. All information about logical positivism/empiricism deals with theory of meaning and language, and has nothing to do with "mature science." If you don't want to give me the answer that's fine, but at least help me understand the question. Here:

The philosophical approach of logical empiricism aimed at our making understand(see the strange grammar) how totally unexpected developments in natural science, like the advent of relativity theory and of quantum mechanics, could come about. To achieve such understanding, logical empiricism tried to analyze the logical structure of mature science. In what way can this analysis help us achieve such understanding? What is the role of experience in the approach of logical empiricism? What conception of scientific progress does this approach imply?

Ok, here is the difficulty: How am I supposed to to explain how an understanding of the logical structure of science helps understand why developments in science happen? Don't the developments in science happen because we figure out what is actually happening in the world. We observe empirical facts. There is no logic involved. I obviously don't get it. I don't know where else to look.

i would go and see the professor and tell him/her that i dont understand and could u help me understand. if he/she wont help go ask a different professor that dose the same subject.

The philosophical approach of logical empiricism aimed at our making understand(see the strange grammar) how totally unexpected developments in natural science, like the advent of relativity theory and of quantum mechanics, could come about.
Empiricism comes from a greek word meaning to test or to try.(experiment) Logic deals with reasoning. So put it together you have A test based off of reasoning. A reasoning based on observably true statements I would say.
To achieve such understanding, logical empiricism tried to analyze the logical structure of mature science.
The true reasonable statements that would try or test the more advanced scientific discoveries.

In what way can this analysis help us achieve such understanding?
It can help in realizing the process that brings you to the conclusion.
What is the role of experience in the approach of logical empiricism? Look here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empirical_knowledge

What conception of scientific progress does this approach imply? The concept that we should only study that which can be study, thus eliminating metaphysical or faith based concepts.

Hi noahfor,
If it were me, I'd ignore the preamble and research what logical empiricism is myself (hit the library as well as the 'Net), and then address the questions.

The key issues seem to be:
What is logical empiricism? How is experience relevant?
What is the "logical structure of mature science"?
What is the point of analysing this structure?

Links:
Wikipedia - Logical Empiricism/Positivism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logical_empiricism)
Rudolf Carnap (http://www.iep.utm.edu/c/carnap.htm)
Anselm Uni - Logical Empiricism (http://www.anselm.edu/homepage/dbanach/logemp.htm)

Awesome!!! I can't thank you enough. That third link is what I've been looking for. Thanks to everyone else as well.

Glad I could help... but I highly recommend you see what you can find in your library as well. Never rely on a single source, especially on the Internet... there are a lot of crazies out there, even teaching at Universities!

Nice summary, Quigly.

That's a tough one.

I'd say just focus on what the definition of Logical Empiricism (at least this can be found on the net)
Then try to use this first to answer the questions directly.

In what way can logical empiricism (or its analysis of the logical structure of mature science) be used to understand seemingly unexpected developments in natural science?
What is the role of experience in logical empiricism?
What model/view/description of scientific progress does this approach imply?

(or at least that's my translation of them. What exactly is mature science anyway?)

Oh, wow. Looks like it was answered while I was thinking about it.

I'm not really sure what mature science is. Science concerned with context of justification not context of discovery? It's really hard to understand the professor because he is from Greece and uses different grammar, and doesn't really go very deep in his lecture. That's why I'm having trouble, and because we don't have any text.

How is this for a beginning:

In language, complex propositions can be concluded from sets of other of true atomic propositions by appealing only to the logical relationships between these atomic proposition, and not their individual meanings. Logical empiricists held the view that the logical structure of the world mirrored the logical structure of language. Thus, logical empiricists believed that complex truths about the world could be deduced from combinations of atomic truths about the world.

At least it's a start.

Anyway, thanks all.

that was the assignment... to learn how to find and research that which you had no understanding of....

you may pass then.. as you took the steps to find it.. and found the help to do so.. and should realise the emmense power of alittle google and alittle wiki....
-MT

Actually, this is the midterm take home exam. We're allowed to research and discuss the topics so I'm not cheating or anything, but why should a person have to do research for a midterm. And we only have a week to do it, and noone was anticipating having to research anything. Not only that, there is another essay on Kant due the same day, and we were given equally as little information, and the question is probably even harder. Luckily it's alot easier to find information on Kant.

Here's the other question if anyone cares. I don't need any help or anything.

Important developments in mathematics and in physics roughly from the middle of the 19th century to the first two decades of the 20th appeared as undermining the Kantian conception on the foundations of mathematics and of natural science in general. Which aspects of Kant's approach were particularly touched? In what way were they touched? Give some specific examples coming from both mathematics and physics.

Actually, this is the midterm take home exam. We're allowed to research and discuss the topics so I'm not cheating or anything, but why should a person have to do research for a midterm. And we only have a week to do it, and noone was anticipating having to research anything. Not only that, there is another essay on Kant due the same day, and we were given equally as little information, and the question is probably even harder. Luckily it's alot easier to find information on Kant.
Diddums.
I'm often given a similar task with a few hours notice. Get used to it!

Tough question. That's above me.