Maurice Cornforth's 1946 book, "Science versus Idealism: An Examination of 'Pure Empiricism' and Modern Logic," delves into the philosophical debate between science and idealism, focusing on two key points:
 
 1. Pure Empiricism:
 
Cornforth criticizes what he calls "pure empiricism," a philosophical position that emphasizes only sensory experience as the source of knowledge. He argues that pure empiricism fails to explain several key aspects of scientific knowledge, such as:
 
Abstract concepts: How do we form and understand abstract concepts like gravity or evolution, which cannot be directly observed?
 
Theories and models: How are scientific theories developed and validated if they go beyond what is directly observable?
 
Universality and necessity: How can science make universal and necessary claims about the natural world based on individual experiences?
 
Cornforth argues that pure empiricism leads to various problematic consequences, such as undermining the objectivity of scientific knowledge and limiting the scope of scientific inquiry.
 
 2. Modern Logic:
 
Cornforth examines the role of modern logic in the analysis of scientific knowledge. He highlights the contributions of logicians like Frege and Russell in formalizing logical reasoning and analyzing language. However, he argues that some interpretations of modern logic fall into the trap of idealism, by denying the material basis of thought and language.
 
Cornforth advocates for a materialist philosophy of science, emphasizing the interaction between human sensory experience and the material world in the construction of knowledge. He sees science as a dynamic process of observation, experimentation, and theoretical development, informed by both empirical data and our evolving understanding of the world.
 
Very Good Hardcover Copy. No Dust Cover.