Abstract
I HESITATE to reply to Prof. H. Levy's letter in NATURE of April 20 because the questions raised are matter for arm-chairs and midnight oil rather than correspondence. Some comment, however, must be made, so, leaving the justification of my own philosophical outlook for a more convenient occasion, I will simply refer briefly to the charge that I am representing my viewpoint as “a necessary consequence of scientific discovery”.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Access options
Subscribe to this journal
Receive 51 print issues and online access
$199.00 per year
only $3.90 per issue
Buy this article
- Purchase on Springer Link
- Instant access to full article PDF
Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout
Similar content being viewed by others
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
DINGLE, H. Philosophical Interpretation of Science. Nature 135, 793–794 (1935). https://doi.org/10.1038/135793d0
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/135793d0
This article is cited by
-
Philosophical Interpretation of Science
Nature (1935)
Comments
By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.
