David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Philosophical Quarterly 61 (243):247-269 (2011)
If there is collective scientific knowledge, then at least some scientific groups have beliefs over and above the personal beliefs of their members. Gilbert's plural-subjects theory makes precise the notion of ‘over and above’ here. Some philosophers have used plural-subjects theory to argue that philosophical, historical and sociological studies of science should take account of collective beliefs of scientific groups. Their claims rest on the premise that our best explanations of scientific change include these collective beliefs. I argue that Gilbert's account of collective scientific belief does not provide a better explanation of scientific change than a non-collective alternative. A different defence of collective scientific belief and knowledge is needed
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||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
Johannes Persson (2011). Explanation in Metaphysics? Metaphysica 12 (2):165-181.
William Rehg (2013). The Social Authority of Paradigms as Group Commitments: Rehabilitating Kuhn with Recent Social Philosophy. Topoi 32 (1):21-31.
Jeroen de Ridder (2013). Epistemic Dependence and Collective Scientific Knowledge. Synthese 191 (1):1-17.
Melinda Fagan (2012). Collective Scientific Knowledge. Philosophy Compass 7 (12):821-831.
Susann Wagenknecht (2015). Facing the Incompleteness of Epistemic Trust: Managing Dependence in Scientific Practice. Social Epistemology 29 (2):160-184.
Similar books and articles
Boudewijn de Bruin (2009). We and the Plural Subject. Philosophy of the Social Sciences 39 (2):235-259.
Linda Radzik (2001). Collective Responsibility and Duties to Respond. Social Theory and Practice 27 (3):455-471.
Don Fallis (2007). Collective Epistemic Goals. Social Epistemology 21 (3):267 – 280.
Ingo Brigandt (2012). The Dynamics of Scientific Concepts: The Relevance of Epistemic Aims and Values. In Uljana Feest & Friedrich Steinle (eds.), Scientific Concepts and Investigative Practice. De Gruyter 3--75.
Monika Wulz, Collective Cognitive Processes Around 1930. Edgar Zilsel's Epistemology of Mass Phenomena.
Margaret Gilbert (2002). Collective Guilt and Collective Guilt Feelings. Journal of Ethics 6 (2):115-143.
Sara Rachel Chant & Zachary Ernst (2008). Epistemic Conditions for Collective Action. Mind 117 (467):549-573.
Reza Lahroodi (2007). Collective Epistemic Virtues. Social Epistemology 21 (3):281 – 297.
Paul Thagard (2010). Explaining Economic Crises: Are There Collective Representations? Episteme 7 (3):266-283.
K. Brad Wray (2001). Collective Belief and Acceptance. Synthese 129 (3):319-33.
Added to index2010-07-15
Total downloads67 ( #34,008 of 1,699,551 )
Recent downloads (6 months)12 ( #53,539 of 1,699,551 )
How can I increase my downloads?