<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="static/style.xsl"?><OAI-PMH xmlns="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/OAI-PMH.xsd"><responseDate>2026-04-26T21:57:16Z</responseDate><request verb="GetRecord" identifier="oai:uvadoc.uva.es:10324/48500" metadataPrefix="edm">https://uvadoc.uva.es/oai/request</request><GetRecord><record><header><identifier>oai:uvadoc.uva.es:10324/48500</identifier><datestamp>2021-09-02T20:47:03Z</datestamp><setSpec>com_10324_1156</setSpec><setSpec>com_10324_931</setSpec><setSpec>com_10324_894</setSpec><setSpec>col_10324_1294</setSpec></header><metadata><rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:doc="http://www.lyncode.com/xoai" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:ore="http://www.openarchives.org/ore/terms/" xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/" xmlns:ds="http://dspace.org/ds/elements/1.1/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:edm="http://www.europeana.eu/schemas/edm/" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns# http://www.europeana.eu/schemas/edm/EDM.xsd">
<edm:ProvidedCHO rdf:about="https://uvadoc.uva.es/handle/10324/48500">
<dc:creator>Marcos Martínez, Alfredo Faustino</dc:creator>
<dc:date>2021</dc:date>
<dc:description>Producción Científica</dc:description>
<dc:description>In this article, I argue that there is philosophy of science since philosophy existed. &#xd;
Thus, the idea that the philosophy of science was born with neopositivism is histori cally wrong and detrimental to the development of the philosophy of science itself. &#xd;
Neopositivism tried to found the philosophy of science as an anti-philosophical dis cipline, as a feld of study that came to replace simple philosophy. The attempt was &#xd;
maintained for thirty years, but failed. Now, this does not mean that we cannot make &#xd;
good philosophy of science today, but that the philosophy of science has returned to &#xd;
the common house of philosophy, it is gradually recovering the connection that it &#xd;
should never have lost with the main philosophical traditions and disciplines</dc:description>
<dc:format>application/pdf</dc:format>
<dc:identifier>https://uvadoc.uva.es/handle/10324/48500</dc:identifier>
<dc:language>eng</dc:language>
<dc:publisher>Springer</dc:publisher>
<dc:subject>72 Filosofía</dc:subject>
<dc:title>Philosophy of science and philosophy: The long flight home</dc:title>
<dc:type>info:eu-repo/semantics/article</dc:type>
<edm:type>TEXT</edm:type>
</edm:ProvidedCHO>
<ore:Aggregation rdf:about="https://uvadoc.uva.es/handle/10324/48500#aggregation">
<edm:aggregatedCHO rdf:resource="https://uvadoc.uva.es/handle/10324/48500"/>
<edm:dataProvider>UVaDOC. Repositorio Documental de la Universidad de Valladolid</edm:dataProvider>
<edm:isShownAt rdf:resource="https://uvadoc.uva.es/handle/10324/48500"/>
<edm:isShownBy rdf:resource="https://uvadoc.uva.es/bitstream/10324/48500/1/Philosophy-science-philosophy.pdf"/>
<edm:provider>Hispana</edm:provider>
<edm:rights rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"/>
</ore:Aggregation>
<edm:WebResource rdf:about="https://uvadoc.uva.es/bitstream/10324/48500/1/Philosophy-science-philosophy.pdf">
<edm:rights rdf:resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/"/>
</edm:WebResource>
</rdf:RDF></metadata></record></GetRecord></OAI-PMH>