Book contents
- A Philosopher Looks at Science
- A Philosopher Looks at
- A Philosopher Looks at Science
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Figures
- Acknowledgements
- Introduction
- 1 Theory + Experiment Do Not a Science Make
- 2 Dethroning the Queen
- 3 A Nature More Negotiable
- Parting Thoughts
- Notes
- Bibliography
- Index
- References
Bibliography
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 10 June 2022
Book contents
- A Philosopher Looks at Science
- A Philosopher Looks at
- A Philosopher Looks at Science
- Copyright page
- Dedication
- Contents
- Figures
- Acknowledgements
- Introduction
- 1 Theory + Experiment Do Not a Science Make
- 2 Dethroning the Queen
- 3 A Nature More Negotiable
- Parting Thoughts
- Notes
- Bibliography
- Index
- References
Summary
A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- A Philosopher Looks at Science , pp. 195 - 201Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2022
References
Adamantidis, Antoine R., Zhang, Feng, Aravanis, Alexander M., Deisseroth, Karl and de-Lecea, Luis 2007. ‘Neural substrates of awakening probed with optogenetic control of hypocretin neurons’, Nature 450: 420–424.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Andreas, Holger 2017. ‘Theoretical Terms in Science’, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/theoretical-terms-science/.Google Scholar
Aponte, Yexica, Atasoy, Deniz and Sternson, Scott M. 2011. ‘AGRP neurons are sufficient to orchestrate feeding behavior rapidly and without training’, Nature Neuroscience 14: 351–355.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Arabatzis, Theodore 2001. ‘The Zeeman effect and the discovery of the electron’, in Buchwald, Jed Z. and Warwick, Andrew (eds), Histories of the Electron. MIT Press, 171–194.Google Scholar
Barrotta, Pierluigi and Montuschi, Eleonora 2018. ‘The dam project: who are the experts?’, in Barrotta, Pierluigi and Scarafile, Giovanni (eds), Science and Democracy: Controversies and Conflicts. John Benjamins Publishing Company, 17–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berengarten, Richard 2019. ‘On universalism and particularism or looking at flowers again: twelve propositions’, Margutte, http://www.margutte.com/?p=30603&lang=en.Google Scholar
Bickle, John 2006. ‘Reducing mind to molecular pathways: explicating the reductionism implicit in current cellular and molecular neuroscience’, Synthese 151: 411–434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bollhagen, Andrew 2021. ‘The inchworm episode: reconstituting the phenomenon of kinesin motility’, European Journal for Philosophy of Science 11: 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buchwald, Jed Z. and Warwick, Andrew 2001. ‘Introduction’, in Buchwald, Jed Z. and Warwick, Andrew (eds), Histories of the Electron. MIT Press, 1–18.Google Scholar
Cartwright, Nancy 1999. The Dappled World: A Study of the Boundaries of Science. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cartwright, Nancy 2019. Nature, the Artful Modeler: Lectures on Laws, Science, How Nature Arranges the World and How We Can Arrange It Better. Open Court Publishing.Google Scholar
Cartwright, Nancy, Hardie, Jeremy, Montuschi, Eleonora, Soleiman, Matthew and Thresher, Ann Forthcoming. The Tangle of Science: Reliability beyond the Scientific Method, Rigour, and Objectivity. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Chang, Hasok 2015. ‘Reductionism and the relation between chemistry and physics’, in Arabatzis, Theodore, Renn, Jürgen and Simões, Ana (eds), Relocating the History of Science: Essays in Honor of Kostas Gavroglu. Springer, 193–209.Google Scholar
Daston, Lorraine and Park, Katharine 1998. Wonders and the Order of Nature, 1150–1750. Zone Books.Google Scholar
Davidson, Donald 1970. ‘Mental events’, in Davidson, Donald (1980) Essays on Actions and Events. Oxford University Press, 201–224.Google Scholar
Deaton, Angus 2020. ‘Randomization in the tropics revisited: a theme and eleven variations’ (No. w27600). National Bureau of Economic Research.Google Scholar
Dirac, Paul Adrien Maurice 1929. ‘Quantum mechanics of many-electron systems’, Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A, Containing Papers of a Mathematical and Physical Character 123: 714–733.Google Scholar
Eddington, A. S. 1928. The Nature of the Physical World: The Gifford Lectures, 1927. Macmillan.Google Scholar
Ferguson, Christopher J. 2009. ‘An effect size primer: a guide for clinicians and researchers’, Professional Psychology: Research and Practice 40: 532–538.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fleck, Ludwik 1979. Genesis and Development of a Scientific Fact. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Fox-Keller, Evelyn 1983. A Feeling for the Organism: The Life and Work of Barbara McClintock. A. W. H. Freeman/Owl Books.Google Scholar
Fox Keller, Evelyn 2014. ‘Pot-holes everywhere: how (not) to read my biography of Barbara McClintock’, in Govoni, Paola and Franceschi, Zelda Alice (eds), Writing about Lives in Science. Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht unipress, 33–42.Google Scholar
Galvani, Luigi, 1791. D Viribus Electricitatis in Motu Musculari Commentarius. Press of the Academy of Sciences.Google Scholar
Gardner, W. H. 1969. ‘Gerard Manley Hopkins and the poetry of inscape’, Theoria 33: 1–16.Google Scholar
Gilboa, Itzhak 2009. Theory of Decision under Uncertainty. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glanvill, Joseph 2011. Scepsis Scientifica, or the Vanity of Dogmatizing. Ex-Classics Project.Google Scholar
Guskey, Thomas R. 2019. ‘Interpreting average effect sizes: never a center without a spread’, NASSP Bulletin 103: 273–280.Google Scholar
Hacking, Ian 1983. Representing and Intervening: Introductory Topics in the Philosophy of Natural Science. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hacking, Ian 1991. ‘Speculation, calculation and the creation of phenomena’, in Munévar, Gonzola (ed.), Beyond Reason: Essays on the Philosophy of Paul Feyerabend. Springer, 131–157.Google Scholar
Hacking, Ian 2016. Logic of Statistical Inference. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haldane, J. B. S. 1929. ‘Heredity’, in Encyclopedia Britannica, 14th ed. Encyclopedia Britannica Company, 433–455.Google Scholar
Hempel, Carl G. 1965. ‘The theoretician’s dilemma: a study in the logic of theory construction’, in Hempel, Carl G, Aspects of Scientific Explanation and Other Essays in the Philosophy of Science. The Free Press, 173–226.Google Scholar
Hendry, Robin Findlay 2010. ‘Emergence vs. reduction in chemistry’, in Macdonald, Cynthia and Macdonald, Graham (eds), Emergence in Mind. Oxford University Press, 205–221.Google Scholar
Henry, John 2008. The Scientific Revolution and the Origins of Modern Science. Macmillan International Higher Education.Google Scholar
Hitchcock, Christopher and Sober, Elliot 2004. ‘Prediction versus accommodation and the risk of overfitting’, British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 55: 1–34.Google Scholar
Hua, Wei, Chung, Johnson and Gelles, Jeff 2002. ‘Distinguishing inchworm and hand-over-hand processive kinesin movement by neck rotation measurements’, Science 295(5556): 844–848.Google Scholar
Hume, David 1779 [2020]. Hume’s Dialogues concerning Natural Religion. Lindhardt og Ringhof.Google Scholar
Insel, Thomas, Cuthbert, Bruce, Garvey, Marjorie, Heinssen, Robert, Pine, Daniel S., Quinn, Kevin, Sanislow, Charles and Wang, Philip 2010. ‘Research domain criteria (RDoC): toward a new classification framework for research on mental disorders’, The American Journal of Psychiatry 167: 748–751.Google Scholar
Kaiser, D., 2005. Drawing Theories Apart: The Dispersion of Feynman Diagrams in Postwar Physics. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Kandel, E. R., 2007. In Search of Memory: The Emergence of a New Science of Mind. W. W. Norton & Company.Google Scholar
Kay, John and King, Mervyn 2020. Radical Uncertainty: Decision‐Making beyond the Numbers. Bridge Street Press.Google Scholar
Kuhn, Thomas S. 1987. Black-Body Theory and the Quantum Discontinuity, 1894–1912. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Ladyman, James, Ross, Don, Spurrett, David and Collier, John 2007. Every Thing Must Go: Metaphysics Naturalized. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Latour, Bruno and Woolgar, Steve 1986. Laboratory Life: The Construction of Scientific Facts. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Maxwell, J. C. 1860. ‘II. Illustrations of the dynamical theory of gases’, The London, Edinburgh, and Dublin Philosophical Magazine and Journal of Science 20: 21–37.Google Scholar
McLaughlin, Brian and Bennett, Karen 2018. ‘Supervenience’, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/supervenience/.Google Scholar
Menger, Carl 1985. Investigations into the Method of the Social Sciences. New York University Press.Google Scholar
Miller, David I., Nolla, Kyle M., Eagly, Alice H. and Uttal, David H. 2018. ‘The development of children’s gender-science stereotypes: a meta-analysis of 5 decades of U.S. draw-a-scientist studies’, Child Development 89: 1943–1955.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Millikan, R. A. 1913. ‘On the elementary electrical charge and the Avogadro constant’, Physical Review 2: 109–143.Google Scholar
Milward, P. 1989. ‘Hopkins on man and being’, in Fennell, Francis L. (ed.) The Fine Delight: Centenary Essays on Gerard Manley Hopkins. Loyola University Press, 127–144.Google Scholar
Morgan, Mary S. and Morrison, Margaret (eds) 1999. Models as Mediators. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Munro, E., Cartwright, N., Hardie, J. and Montuschi, E. 2016. Improving Child Safety: Deliberation, Judgement and Empirical Research. Centre for Humanities Engaging Science and Society.Google Scholar
Nagel, Ernest 1961. The Structure of Science: Problems in the Logic of Explanation. Harcourt, Brace & World, Inc.Google Scholar
National Academy of Sciences & Institute of Medicine 2008. Science, Evolution, and Creationism. National Academies Press.Google Scholar
Navarro, Jaume 2012. A History of the Electron: JJ and GP Thomson. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
O’Neill, Eileen, ed. 2001. Observations upon Experimental Philosophy by Margaret Cavendish. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Oppenheim, Paul and Putnam, Hilary 1958. ‘Unity of science as a working hypothesis’, Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science 2: 3–36.Google Scholar
Rose, Nikolas and Abi-Rached, Joelle M. 2013. Neuro: The New Brain Sciences and the Management of the Mind. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Schäfer, Thomas and Schwarz, Marcus A. 2019. ‘The meaningfulness of effect sizes in psychological research: differences between sub-disciplines and the impact of potential biases’, Frontiers in Psychology 10, https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00813.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schattschneider, E. E. 1960. Party Government: American Government in Action. Transaction Publishers.Google Scholar
Sheredos, B., Burston, D. C., Abrahamsen, A. and Bechtel, W. 2013. ‘Why do biologists use so many diagrams?’, Philosophy of Science, 80: 931–944.Google Scholar
Steinle, Friedrich 1997. ‘Entering new fields: exploratory uses of experimentation’, Philosophy of Science 64: S65–S74.Google Scholar
Stoljar, Daniel 2021. ‘Physicalism’, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/physicalism/.Google Scholar
Vidal, Fernando 2009. ‘Brainhood, anthropological figure of modernity’, History of the Human Sciences 22: 5–36.Google Scholar
Whelan, F. G. 1983. ‘Prologue: democratic theory and the boundary problem’, in Penncok, James R. and Chapman, John W. (eds), Nomos 25. New York University Press, 13–47.Google Scholar
Wise, M. Norton 2017. ‘On the narrative form of simulations’, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 62: 74–85.Google Scholar
Wise, M. Norton 2020. ‘Roundtable with 2019 Sarton Medalist, Norton Wise’, Newsletter of the History of Science Society 49, https://cdn.ymaws.com/hssonline.org/resource/resmgr/newsletter_archive/hss-nl-2020-vol49-n3-july.pdf.Google Scholar