Cookies Policy
X

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies.

I accept this policy

Find out more here

May the Reinforcement Be with You: On the Reconstruction of Scientific Episodes

No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
The full text of this article is not currently available.

Brill’s MyBook program is exclusively available on BrillOnline Books and Journals. Students and scholars affiliated with an institution that has purchased a Brill E-Book on the BrillOnline platform automatically have access to the MyBook option for the title(s) acquired by the Library. Brill MyBook is a print-on-demand paperback copy which is sold at a favorably uniform low price.

Access this article

+ Tax (if applicable)
Add to Favorites
You must be logged in to use this functionality

image of Journal of the Philosophy of History

Like theories, reconstructions of episodes in the history of science can possess, or lack, certain virtues such that, when we face two or more different reconstructions of the same episode, we assume that we should choose the most “virtuous one”. However, we will argue that, with dissimilar reconstructions of the same episode, it is not always necessary to separate the “good ones” from the “wrong ones”, and that, as a matter of fact, each reconstruction could provide different but perhaps equally relevant data about the episode, about science in general, and about particular philosophical theses. In order to help us to identify these benefits, we will present a criterion that guides the search for historiographical reinforcement of philosophical theses and we will use it to evaluate three different reconstructions of the same scientific episode.

Affiliations: 1: Institute for Philosophical Research, UNAM martinezordazm@gmail.com ; 2: Institute for Philosophical Research, UNAM loisyaxsegrob@gmail.com

10.1163/18722636-12341395
/content/journals/10.1163/18722636-12341395
dcterms_title,pub_keyword,dcterms_description,pub_author
10
5
Loading
Loading

Full text loading...

/content/journals/10.1163/18722636-12341395
Loading

Data & Media loading...

1. Aronstein Laurie E. Parasitic Worms: Their Role in Medicine and Science in Modern Europe BA project, Oregon State University June 2013
2. Black William An Arithmetical and medical analysis of the diseases and mortality of the human species 1788
3. Burian Richard M."“The Dilemma of Case Studies Resolved: The Virtues of Using Case Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science”" Perspectives on ScienceVol 9 4 2001 383 404 [Crossref]
4. Davey Kevin"“Can good science be logically inconsistent?”" Synthese Is Science Inconsistent? Special IssueVol 191 2014 3009 3026 [Crossref]
5. Dorato Mauro"“Epistemic and nonepistemic values in science”" Science, Values, and Objectivity University of Pittsburgh Press 2004 52 77 [Crossref]
6. Elgin Catherine Z."“Making Manifest: Exemplification in the sciences and the arts”" PrincipiaVol 15 2011 399 413
7. Elgin Catherine Z."“Exemplification in Understanding”" Explaining Understanding: New Perspectives from Epistemology and Philosophy of Science Routledge 2017 76 91
8. Elsamahi Mohamed"“Coherence between theories”" Canadian Journal of PhilosophyVol 35 2 2005 331 352 [Crossref]
9. Farley John"“The spontaneous generation controversy (1700–1860): The origin of parasitic worms”" Journal of the History of BiologyVol 5 1 1972 95 125 [Crossref]
10. Farley John"“The spontaneous generation controversy (1859–1880): British and German reactions to the problem of abiogenesis”" Journal of the History of BiologyVol 5 2 1979 285 319 [Crossref]
11. Farley John"“Parasites and the Germ Theory of Disease”" The Milbank QuarterlyVol 67 Supplement 1. Framing Disease: The Creation and Negotiation of Explanatory Schemes 1989 50 68 [Crossref]
12. Farley John, Geison G.L."“Science, politics and Spontaneous Generation in Nineteenth-Century France: the Pasteur-Pouchet Debate”" Bulletin of the History of MedicineVol 48 1974 161 198
13. Flyvbjerg Bent"“Five misunderstandings about case-study research”" Qualitative InquiryVol Vol. 12 No. 2 2006 219 245 [Crossref]
14. Gálvez Antonio"“The role of the French Academy of Sciences in the clarification of the issue of spontaneous generation in the mid-nineteenth century”" Annals of ScienceVol 45 4 1988 345 365 [Crossref]
15. Gerring John Case Study Research: Principles and Practices Cambridge University Press 2007
16. Hempel Carl G."“Science and human values”" Aspect of scientific explanation and other essays in the philosophy of science New York Free Press 1965 81 96
17. Kinzel Katherina"“Narrative and evidence. How can case studies from the history of science support claims in the philosophy of science?”" Studies in History and Philosophy of ScienceVol Part A 49 2015 48 57 [Crossref]
18. Kuhn Thomas The Essential Tension: Selected Studies in Scientific Tradition and Change University of Chicago Press 1977
19. Kuukkanen Jouni-Matti"“Historicism and the failure of HPS”" Studies in History and Philosophy of ScienceVol Part A 55 2016 3 11 [Crossref]
20. Lacey Hugh"“Is there a distinction between cognitive and social values?”" Science, Values, and Objectivity University of Pittsburgh Press 2004 24 51 [Crossref]
21. Lakatos Imre"“History of science and its rational reconstructions”" The Methodology of Research Programmes Cambridge University Press 1978 102 138 [Crossref]
22. Laudan Larry Progress and its Problems: Towards a Theory of Scientific Growth University of California Press 1977
23. Laudan Larry"“The Epistemic, the Cognitive and the Social”" Science, Values, and Objectivity University of Pittsburgh Press 2004 14 23 [Crossref]
24. Longino Helen Science as Social Knowledge: Values and Objectivity in Scientific Inquiry Princeton University Press 1990
25. Lysons Daniel An Essay on the Effects of Camphire and Calomel in Continual Fevers 1772
26. Martínez-Ordaz María del Rosario A Classification for Functional and Inconsistent Scientific Theories: Scope and Limitations Master Thesis. UNAM, México 2014 In Spanish
27. Nickles Thomas"“Remarks on the use of history as evidence”" SyntheseVol 69 Testing Theories of Scientific Change Special Issue 69 (2) 1986 253 266
28. Nickles Thomas"“Philosophy of Science and History of Science”" OsirisVol 10 1995 139 163 [Crossref]
29. Popper Karl Logic of Scientific Discovery New York Science Editions 1995
30. Pitt Joseph C."“The dilemma of case studies: toward a Heraclitian philosophy of science”" Perspectives on ScienceVol 9 4 2001 373 382 [Crossref]
31. Priest Graham"“Inconsistency and the empirical sciences”" Inconsistency in Science Kluwer Academic Publishers 2002 119 128 [Crossref]
32. Schickore Jutta"“More thoughts on HPS: Another 20 Years Later”" Perspectives on ScienceVol 19 4 2011 453 481 [Crossref]
33. Vickers Peter Understanding Inconsistent Science Oxford University Press 2013 [Crossref]
http://brill.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1163/18722636-12341395
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1163/18722636-12341395
2018-08-08
2018-08-15

Sign-in

Can't access your account?
  • Tools

  • Add to Favorites
  • Printable version
  • Email this page
  • Subscribe to ToC alert
  • Get permissions
  • Recommend to your library

    You must fill out fields marked with: *

    Librarian details
    Your details
    Why are you recommending this title?
    Select reason:
     
    Journal of the Philosophy of History — Recommend this title to your library
  • Export citations
  • Key

  • Full access
  • Open Access
  • Partial/No accessInformation