<?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>2026-05-05T18:33:36Z</responseDate><request verb="GetRecord" identifier="oai:uvadoc.uva.es:10324/48500" metadataPrefix="qdc">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><qdc:qualifieddc xmlns:qdc="http://dspace.org/qualifieddc/" xmlns:doc="http://www.lyncode.com/xoai" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xsi:schemaLocation="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/ http://dublincore.org/schemas/xmls/qdc/2006/01/06/dc.xsd http://purl.org/dc/terms/ http://dublincore.org/schemas/xmls/qdc/2006/01/06/dcterms.xsd http://dspace.org/qualifieddc/ http://www.ukoln.ac.uk/metadata/dcmi/xmlschema/qualifieddc.xsd">
<dc:title>Philosophy of science and philosophy: The long flight home</dc:title>
<dc:creator>Marcos Martínez, Alfredo Faustino</dc:creator>
<dcterms:abstract>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</dcterms:abstract>
<dcterms:dateAccepted>2021-09-02T12:03:10Z</dcterms:dateAccepted>
<dcterms:available>2021-09-02T12:03:10Z</dcterms:available>
<dcterms:created>2021-09-02T12:03:10Z</dcterms:created>
<dcterms:issued>2021</dcterms:issued>
<dc:type>info:eu-repo/semantics/article</dc:type>
<dc:identifier>Axiomathes, 2021</dc:identifier>
<dc:identifier>1122-1151</dc:identifier>
<dc:identifier>https://uvadoc.uva.es/handle/10324/48500</dc:identifier>
<dc:identifier>10.1007/s10516-021-09574-3</dc:identifier>
<dc:identifier>Axiomathes</dc:identifier>
<dc:identifier>1572-8390</dc:identifier>
<dc:language>eng</dc:language>
<dc:relation>https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10516-021-09574-3</dc:relation>
<dc:rights>info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess</dc:rights>
<dc:rights>http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</dc:rights>
<dc:rights>© 2021 The Authors</dc:rights>
<dc:rights>Atribución 4.0 Internacional</dc:rights>
<dc:publisher>Springer</dc:publisher>
</qdc:qualifieddc></metadata></record></GetRecord></OAI-PMH>