In seeking to defend a form of naturalism that avoids both scientism and the reduction of philosophy to science, Robert Almeder defines philosophy and distinguishes it from the domain of natural science by showing how a good philosophical explanation, while empirically testable, differs from a good scientific explanation.
I will quote from the Introduction (page 3): "Let me first briefly state this book's argument in a very general way. Scientism, as described in either of the two forms just noted, is rationally indefensible, and yet there is a defensible form of naturalism that does not directly or indirectly reduce philosophical explanations to scientific explanations--although philosophical explanations are implicitly empirically testable and hence confirmable or fasifiable. In short, I will defend a reasonably comprehensive naturalism while avoiding both scientism and the reduction of philosophical claims and explanations to stricly scientific claims and explanations. In so doing, I also hope to define philosophy by showing how a good philsophical explananation, while empirically testable, differs from a good scientfic explanation."
ThriftBooks sells millions of used books at the lowest everyday prices. We personally assess every book's quality and offer rare, out-of-print treasures. We deliver the joy of reading in recyclable packaging with free standard shipping on US orders over $15. ThriftBooks.com. Read more. Spend less.