Philosophical Thought
eISSN : 0000-0000
10.5
citescore
CiteScore measures the average citations received per peer-reviewed document published in this title. CiteScore values are based on citation counts in a range of four years (e.g. 2018-2021) to peer-reviewed documents (articles, reviews, conference papers, data papers and book chapters) published in the same four calendar years, divided by the number of these documents in these same four years
10.5
impact factor
CiteScore measures the average citations received per peer-reviewed document published in this title. CiteScore values are based on citation counts in a range of four years (e.g. 2018-2021) to peer-reviewed documents (articles, reviews, conference papers, data papers and book chapters) published in the same four calendar years, divided by the number of these documents in these same four years (e.g. 2018 – 21).
10.5
pubmed
CiteScore measures the average citations received per peer-reviewed document published in this title. CiteScore values are based on citation counts in a range of four years (e.g. 2018-2021) to peer-reviewed documents (articles, reviews, conference papers, data papers and book chapters) published in the same four calendar years, divided by the number of these documents in these same four years (e.g. 2018 – 21).
10.5
Embase
Biosis Preview
Volume 6, Issue 2 (2026)
3 2026, 6(2): 197-212 |
Back to browse issues page
Request Type:
History
Received: 2026/05/30 | Accepted: 2026/07/3 | Published: 2026/07/11
Received: 2026/05/30 | Accepted: 2026/07/3 | Published: 2026/07/11
How to cite this article
Mamkarimmi H, Mortazavi M. Does the Theory-Ladenness of Observation Necessarily Entail Constructivism?. 3 2026; 6 (2) :197-212
URL: http://jpt.daneshafarand.org/article-6-85698-en.html
URL: http://jpt.daneshafarand.org/article-6-85698-en.html
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Rights and permissions
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
1- Department of Scientific Research, Education, Mahabad, Iran
2- Department of General Psychology, T.C. (Tabriz Campus), Islamic Azad University, Tabriz, Iran
2- Department of General Psychology, T.C. (Tabriz Campus), Islamic Azad University, Tabriz, Iran
Abstract (345 Views)
The thesis of the theory-ladenness of observation claims that neutral, unbiased observation is impossible. Based on this thesis, some philosophers have inferred that facts—or more precisely, reality independent of mental influences—do not exist, and that human knowledge of the world is a social construct. The aim of this paper is to assess whether the theory-ladenness of observation necessarily entails a constructivist view, or whether it still allows us to speak about reality. To this end, the concepts of "theory-ladenness of observation" and "constructivism" will be clarified. It will then be argued that although the theory-ladenness of observation is acceptable, we are not compelled to adopt constructivism; rather, this thesis can provide an attractive framework for realist theses. Finally, the paper indicates some implications of this view for evaluating epistemological proposals.
Keywords: