What are common criticisms of Bridgman's operationalism?
A common criticism is that operationalism is too restrictive—that it reduces concepts to mere measurement procedures and cannot account for theoretical entities like electrons or quarks. Critics argue that if we strictly follow operationalism, we might have to discard useful concepts that are not directly measurable. I acknowledge this concern, but I believe it misunderstands my position. In *The Logic of Modern Physics*, I did not claim that all concepts must be operationally defined in a narrow sense; rather, I argued that the meaning of a concept is tied to the operations that verify it. For example, the concept of an electron is meaningful because we have operations—like cloud chamber tracks or scattering experiments—that give it empirical content. The real danger is not operationalism but the lazy acceptance of vague, untestable notions. Science must remain anchored in what we can do and observe.
Ask Percy Williams Bridgman the follow-up →