So with over 270 votes in our most recent poll, here is the top 20:
| 1. Rudolf Carnap (Condorcet winner: wins contests with all other choices) |
| 2. Thomas S. Kuhn loses to Rudolf Carnap by 92–89 |
| 3. Carl G. Hempel loses to Rudolf Carnap by 106–64, loses to Thomas S. Kuhn by 99–74 |
| 4. Karl Popper loses to Rudolf Carnap by 99–64, loses to Carl G. Hempel by 94–73 |
| 5. Bas van Fraassen loses to Rudolf Carnap by 111–69, loses to Karl Popper by 89–78 |
| 6. W.V.O. Quine loses to Rudolf Carnap by 115–50, loses to Bas van Fraassen by 99–71 |
| 7. Hans Reichenbach loses to Rudolf Carnap by 124–35, loses to W.V.O. Quine by 81–67 |
| 8. Nancy Cartwright loses to Rudolf Carnap by 127–40, loses to Hans Reichenbach by 78–72 |
| 9. Paul Feyerabend loses to Rudolf Carnap by 123–50, loses to Nancy Cartwright by 83–74 |
| 10. Ian Hacking loses to Rudolf Carnap by 123–45, loses to Paul Feyerabend by 78–74 |
| 11. Imre Lakatos loses to Rudolf Carnap by 130–39, loses to Ian Hacking by 76–71 |
| 12. Hilary Putnam loses to Rudolf Carnap by 122–41, loses to Imre Lakatos by 75–71 |
| 13. Philip Kitcher loses to Rudolf Carnap by 133–35, loses to Hilary Putnam by 85–63 |
| 14. Wesley Salmon loses to Rudolf Carnap by 133–24, loses to Philip Kitcher by 70–62 |
| 15. Ernest Nagel loses to Rudolf Carnap by 135–31, loses to Wesley Salmon by 61–58 |
| 16. Elliott Sober loses to Rudolf Carnap by 136–29, loses to Ernest Nagel by 66–55 |
| 17. John Earman loses to Rudolf Carnap by 129–30, loses to Elliott Sober by 62–60 |
| 18. Nelson Goodman loses to Rudolf Carnap by 138–28, loses to John Earman by 67–65 |
| 19. Patrick Suppes loses to Rudolf Carnap by 133–20, loses to Nelson Goodman by 72–54 |
| 20. Larry Laudan loses to Rudolf Carnap by 134–21, loses to Patrick Suppes by 58–56 |
Runners-up for the top 20 included Michael Friedman, Wilfrid Sellars, Arthur Fine, and Clark Glymour. Unlike in the Kant poll, there didn't appear to be a strong bias in favor of living contemporaries. The top ten living philosophers of science in the poll were van Fraassen, Cartwright, Hacking, Putnam, Kitcher, Sober, Earman, Laudan, Friedman, and Fine. Of course, philosophy of science as a field has changed dramatically since 1945: the general questions about the nature of explanation or the logic of induction have given way to questions raised within the philosophy of particular sciences, especially physics and biology.
Thoughts from readers?
