Philosophy
Experimental research is commonly held up as the paradigm of “good” science. Although experiment plays many roles in science, its classical role is testing hypotheses in controlled laboratory settings. Historical science (which includes work in geology, biology, and astronomy, as well as paleontology and archaeology) is sometimes held to be inferior on the grounds that its hypothesis cannot be tested by controlled laboratory experiments. Using contemporary examples from diverse scientific disciplines, this paper explores differences in practice between historical and experimental research vis-a`-vis the testing of hypotheses. It rejects the claim that historical research is epistemically inferior. For as I argue, scientists engage in two very different patterns of evidential reasoning and, although there is overlap, one pattern predominates in historical research and the other pattern predominates in classical experimental research. I show that these different patterns of reasoning are grounded in an objective and remarkably pervasive time asymmetry of nature.
"Methodological and Epistemic Differences between Historical Science and Experimental Science" by Carol E. Cleland
- What Is/ought To Be The Purpose Of Science Education?
I've been reading classic texts in alchemy the last few days. Interesting stuff. It's for the textbook in the history and philosophy of science that I am working on and the central idea is to have students pick the science of their interest and...
- Laura Snyder - The Philosophical Breakfast Club
When we think about scientists, and especially the birth of science, our minds usually go straight to Galileo, Descartes, Kepler and Newton, and then to folks like Michael Faraday, Joseph Priestly, Antoine Lavoisier, Lord Kelvin, Darwin, etc. Or maybe...
- No Evidence, But Pubically Accepted...richard Feynman's "cargo Cult Science"
"More on the crisis in research: Feynman on 'cargo cult science'" by Michael Hiltzik October 28th, 2013 latimes.com After reading my weekend column about the crisis in life science research, Hajime Hoji of USC's linguistics department reminded...
- Inseperable...philosophy And Science
Abstract... In this paper I review the problematic relationship between science and philosophy; in particular, I will address the question of whether science needs philosophy, and I will offer some positive (if incomplete) perspectives that should be...
- Chemistry Historiography...the Not So Swift Transition, As Believed, From The Phlogiston Theory To Lavoisier’s Theory
The discovery of oxygen. Abstract: Historians often feel that standard philosophical doctrines about the nature and development of science are not adequate for representing the real history of science. However, when philosophers of science fail to make...
Philosophy
Carol E. Cleland's perspective on "evidential reasoning"
Experimental research is commonly held up as the paradigm of “good” science. Although experiment plays many roles in science, its classical role is testing hypotheses in controlled laboratory settings. Historical science (which includes work in geology, biology, and astronomy, as well as paleontology and archaeology) is sometimes held to be inferior on the grounds that its hypothesis cannot be tested by controlled laboratory experiments. Using contemporary examples from diverse scientific disciplines, this paper explores differences in practice between historical and experimental research vis-a`-vis the testing of hypotheses. It rejects the claim that historical research is epistemically inferior. For as I argue, scientists engage in two very different patterns of evidential reasoning and, although there is overlap, one pattern predominates in historical research and the other pattern predominates in classical experimental research. I show that these different patterns of reasoning are grounded in an objective and remarkably pervasive time asymmetry of nature.
"Methodological and Epistemic Differences between Historical Science and Experimental Science" by Carol E. Cleland
- What Is/ought To Be The Purpose Of Science Education?
I've been reading classic texts in alchemy the last few days. Interesting stuff. It's for the textbook in the history and philosophy of science that I am working on and the central idea is to have students pick the science of their interest and...
- Laura Snyder - The Philosophical Breakfast Club
When we think about scientists, and especially the birth of science, our minds usually go straight to Galileo, Descartes, Kepler and Newton, and then to folks like Michael Faraday, Joseph Priestly, Antoine Lavoisier, Lord Kelvin, Darwin, etc. Or maybe...
- No Evidence, But Pubically Accepted...richard Feynman's "cargo Cult Science"
"More on the crisis in research: Feynman on 'cargo cult science'" by Michael Hiltzik October 28th, 2013 latimes.com After reading my weekend column about the crisis in life science research, Hajime Hoji of USC's linguistics department reminded...
- Inseperable...philosophy And Science
Abstract... In this paper I review the problematic relationship between science and philosophy; in particular, I will address the question of whether science needs philosophy, and I will offer some positive (if incomplete) perspectives that should be...
- Chemistry Historiography...the Not So Swift Transition, As Believed, From The Phlogiston Theory To Lavoisier’s Theory
The discovery of oxygen. Abstract: Historians often feel that standard philosophical doctrines about the nature and development of science are not adequate for representing the real history of science. However, when philosophers of science fail to make...