Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T03:34:51.588Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Aesthetics of Theory Selection and the Logics of Art

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2022

Ian O’Loughlin  and
Kate McCallum
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Philosophers of science discuss whether theory selection depends on aesthetic judgments or criteria and whether these putatively aesthetic features are genuinely extra-epistemic. As examples, judgments involving criteria such as simplicity and symmetry are often cited. However, other theory selection criteria, such as fecundity, coherence, internal consistency, and fertility, more closely match those criteria used in art contexts and by scholars working in aesthetics. Paying closer attention to the way these criteria are used in art contexts allows us to understand some evaluative and developmental practices in scientific theory selection as genuinely aesthetic, enlarging the scope of the goals of science.

Type
Articles
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 86 , Issue 2 , April 2019 , pp. 325 - 343
Copyright
Copyright © The Philosophy of Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Barrow, John D. 1988. The World within the World. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
Bourriaud, Nicolas. 1998. Relational Aesthetics. Dijon: Réel.Google Scholar
Boyd, Richard. 1991. “Observations, Explanatory Power, and Simplicity: Toward a Non-Humean Account.” In The Philosophy of Science, ed. Boyd, Richard, Gasper, Philip, and Trout, John D.. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Brading, Katherine, and Castellani, Elena, eds. 2003. Symmetries in Physics: Philosophical Reflections. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Breitenbach, Angela. 2015. “Beauty in Proofs: Kant on Aesthetics in Mathematics.” European Journal of Philosophy 23 (4): 955–77..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bunge, Mario. 1961. “The Weight of Simplicity in the Construction and Assaying of Scientific Theories.” Philosophy of Science 28 (2): 120–49..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chandrasekhar, S. 1984. “The General Theory of Relativity: Why ‘It Is Probably the Most Beautiful of All Existing Theories.’” Journal of Astrophysics and Astronomy 5 (1): 3–11..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chandrasekhar, S.. 1990. Truth and Beauty: Aesthetics and Motivations in Science. Chicago: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Danto, Arthur Coleman. 2007. The Abuse of Beauty. Paul Carus Lectures 21. Chicago: Open Court.Google Scholar
De Regt, Henk W., Leonelli, Sabina, and Eigner, Kai, eds. 2009. Scientific Understanding: Philosophical Perspectives. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elgin, Catherine. 2017. “Nature’s Handmaid, Art.” In Thinking about Science, Reflecting on Art: Bringing Aesthetics and Philosophy of Science Together, ed. Bueno, Otávio, Darby, George, French, Steven, and Rickles, Dean. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Feyerabend, Paul K. 1975. Against Method. London: Verso.Google Scholar
Gingerich, Owen J. 1975. “‘Crisis’ versus Aesthetic in the Copernican Revolution.” Vistas in Astronomy 17:85–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gombrich, E. H. 1994. The Sense of Order: A Study in the Psychology of Decorative Art. 2nd ed. London: Phaidon.Google Scholar
Grimm, Stephen R. 2006. “Is Understanding a Species of Knowledge?” British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 57 (3): 515–35..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hon, G., and Goldstein, B. R.. 2008. From Summetria to Symmetry: The Making of a Revolutionary Scientific Concept. Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoyningen-Huene, Paul, and Sankey, Howard. 2013. Incommensurability and Related Matters. Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science 216. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
Hsieh, Nien-hê. 2016. “Incommensurable Values.” In Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, ed. Zalta, Edward N.. Stanford, CA: Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2016/entries/value-incommensurable/.Google Scholar
Inglis, Matthew, and Aberdein, Andrew. 2014. “Beauty Is Not Simplicity: An Analysis of Mathematicians’ Proof Appraisals.” Philosophia Mathematica 23 (1): 87–109..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kant, Immanuel. 1790/2008. Critique of Judgement. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Kelly, Michael, ed. 1998. Encyclopedia of Aesthetics. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kivy, Peter. 1991. “Science and Aesthetic Appreciation.” Midwest Studies in Philosophy 16 (1): 180–95..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kosso, Peter. 2002. “The Omniscienter: Beauty and Scientific Understanding.” International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 16 (1): 39–48..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuhn, Thomas S. 1962. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kuhn, Thomas S.. 1977/2013. “Objectivity, Value Judgment, and Theory Choice.” In Arguing about Science, ed. Bird, Alexander and Ladyman, James, 74–86. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Laudan, Larry. 2004. “The Epistemic, the Cognitive, and the Social.” In Science, Values, and Objectivity, ed. Machamer, Peter K. and Wolters, Gereon, 14–23. Pittsburgh-Konstanz Series in the Philosophy and History of Science 6. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laudan, Larry, Donovan, Arthur, Laudan, Rachel, Barker, Peter, Brown, Harold, Leplin, Jarrett, Thagard, Paul, and Wykstra, Steve. 1986. “Scientific Change: Philosophical Models and Historical Research.” Synthese 69 (2): 141–223..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levinson, Jerrold. 2003. The Oxford Handbook of Aesthetics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Lincoln, Don. 2013. “Symmetry: How Beautiful Math Makes Elegant Physics.” Nature of Reality, April 25. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/blogs/physics/2013/04/symmetry-how-beautiful-math-makes-elegant-physics/.Google Scholar
McAllister, James W. 1989. “Truth and Beauty in Scientific Reason.” Synthese 78 (1): 25–51..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McAllister, James W.. 1998. “Is Beauty a Sign of Truth in Scientific Theories? Why Are Some New Theories Embraced as Beautiful, Others Spurned as Ugly? Progress in Science May Require That Aesthetic Ideals Themselves Change.” American Scientist 86 (2): 174–83..Google Scholar
McAllister, James W.. 1999. Beauty and Revolution in Science. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McManus, Ian Christopher. 2005. “Symmetry and Asymmetry in Aesthetics and the Arts.” European Review 13 (S2): 157–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McMullin, Ernan. 1982. “Values in Science.” In PSA 1982: Proceedings of the 1982 Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association, Vol. 2, ed. Asquith, Peter D. and Nickles, Thomas, 3–28. East Lansing, MI: Philosophy of Science Association.Google Scholar
McMullin, Ernan. 1993. “Rationality and Paradigm Change in Science.” In World Changes: Thomas Kuhn and the Nature of Science, ed. Horwich, Paul. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Murdoch, Iris. 1959. “The Sublime and the Good.” Chicago Review 13 (3): 42–55..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murdoch, Iris. 2001. The Sovereignty of Good. 2nd ed. Florence, KY: Routledge.Google Scholar
Proust, Marcel. 1929. The Captive. Trans. Scott-Moncrieff, C. K.. New York: Boni.Google Scholar
Rancière, Jacques. 2008. “Aesthetic Separation, Aesthetic Community: Scenes from the Aesthetic Regime of Art.” Art and Research 2 (1): 1–15..Google Scholar
Rancière, Jacques. 2013. The Politics of Aesthetics. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Rosen, Joe. 1995. Symmetry in Science: An Introduction to the General Theory. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
Sankey, Howard. 1993. “Kuhn’s Changing Concept of Incommensurability.” British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 44 (4): 759–74..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sheppard, Anne. 1987. Aesthetics: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Art. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Sober, Elliott. 1975. Simplicity. Clarendon Library of Logic and Philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sober, Elliott. 2015. Ockham’s Razors: A User’s Manual. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stewart, Ian. 2008. Why Beauty Is Truth: A History of Symmetry. New York: Basic.Google Scholar
Stretcher. 2002. “Conversations: Nicolas Bourriaud and Karen Moss.” Stretcher, October 18. http://www.stretcher.org/features/nicolas_bourriaud_and_karen_moss/.Google Scholar
Todd, Cain S. 2008. “Unmasking the Truth Beneath the Beauty: Why the Supposed Aesthetic Judgements Made in Science May Not Be Aesthetic at All.” International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 22 (1): 61–79..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weinberg, Steven. 1993. Dreams of a Final Theory: The Search for the Fundamental Laws of Nature. London: Vintage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zangwill, Nick. 2014. “Aesthetic Judgment.” In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, ed. Zalta, Edward N.. Stanford, CA: Stanford University. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2014/entries/aesthetic-judgment/.Google Scholar