David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
The paper investigates what is meant by "good science" and "bad science" and how these differ as between the natural (physical and biological) sciences on the one hand and social sciences on the other. We conclude on the basis of historical evidence that the natural science are much more heavily constrained by evidence and observation than by theory while the social sciences are constrained by prior theory and hardly at all by direct evidence. Current examples of the latter proposition are taken from recent issues of leading social science journals. We argue that agent based social simulations can be used as a tool to constrain the development of a new social science by direct (what economists dismiss as anecdotal) evidence and that to do so would make social science relevant to the understanding and influencing of social processes. We argue that such a development is both possible and desirable. We do not argue that it is likely.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library||
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Barry Hoffmaster (1981). Family Medicine as a Social Science. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 6 (4):387-410.
Daniel Steel & S. Kedzie Hall (2010). Naturalism and the Enlightenment Ideal : Rethinking a Central Debate in the Philosophy of Social Science. In P. D. Magnus & Jacob Busch (eds.), New Waves in Philosophy of Science. Palgrave Macmillan.
Daniel Little (1991). Varieties of Social Explanation: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Social Science. Westview Press.
Thomas Brante (2010). Review Essay: Perspectival Realism, Representational Models, and the Social Sciences. Philosophy of the Social Sciences 40 (1):107-117.
Peter T. Manicas (2006). A Realist Philosophy of Social Science: Explanation and Understanding. Cambridge University Press.
Harold Kincaid (1996). Philosophical Foundations of the Social Sciences: Analyzing Controversies in Social Research. Cambridge University Press.
Geoff Stokes (1997). Karl Popper's Political Philosophy of Social Science. Philosophy of the Social Sciences 27 (1):56-79.
Bent Flyvbjerg (2001). Making Social Science Matter: Why Social Inquiry Fails and How It Can Succeed Again. Cambridge University Press.
Brian Fay (2006). For Science in the Social Sciences. Philosophy of the Social Sciences 36 (2):227-240.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads12 ( #129,983 of 1,102,731 )
Recent downloads (6 months)4 ( #84,424 of 1,102,731 )
How can I increase my downloads?