David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Theoria 11 (3):19-31 (1996)
This paper presents aprevalent representation about the objectivity and impartiality of scientific knowledge that emerges from the structure and style of the standard research paper. This representation is critically examined considering some rather untypical scientific papers reporting controversies between researchers in a certain field of experimental science. The role of personal preconceptions and intellectual prejudices in the assessment of scientific theories is emphasized by reference to Einsteinls grounds for his general theory of relativity
|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
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Mircea Flonta (1996). Does the Scientific Paper Accurately Mirror the Very Grounds of Scientific Assessment? Theoria 11 (3):19-31.
Craig Callender & Jonathan Cohen (2006). There is No Special Problem About Scientific Representation. Theoria 21 (1):67-85.
Martin Carrier (1990). The Unity of Science. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 4 (1):17-31.
Michela Massimi (2004). Non‐Defensible Middle Ground for Experimental Realism: Why We Are Justified to Believe in Colored Quarks. Philosophy of Science 71 (1):36-60.
William H. Newton-Smith (1981). On the Rational Explanation of the Scientific Chance. Grazer Philosophische Studien 12:47-77.
Kristin Shrader-Frechette (2006). Comparativist Philosophy of Science and Population Viability Assessment in Biology: Helping Resolve Scientific Controversy. Philosophy of Science 73 (5):817-828.
Torsten Wilholt (2010). Scientific Freedom: Its Grounds and Their Limitations. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 41 (2):174-181.
William Goodwin (2013). Structure and Scientific Controversies. Topoi 32 (1):101-110.
Thomas Nickles (1980). Scientific Problems: Three Empiricist Models. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1980:3 - 19.
Jonathan Cohen & Callender Craig (2006). There is No Special Problem About Scientific Representation. Theoria 55 (1):67-85.
Dimitri Ginev (2009). From Existential Conception of Science to Hermeneutic Phenomenology of Scientific Research. Journal of Philosophical Research 34:365-389.
Luca Consoli (2006). Scientific Misconduct and Science Ethics: A Case Study Based Approach. Science and Engineering Ethics 12 (3):533-541.
Joseph D. Sneed (1989). Micro-Economic Models of Problem Choice in Basic Science. Erkenntnis 30 (1-2):207 - 224.
Adam Toon (2010). Models as Make-Believe. In Roman Frigg & Matthew Hunter (eds.), Beyond Mimesis and Convention: Representation in Art and Science. Boston Studies in Philosophy of Science.
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
Added to index2011-01-09
Total downloads2 ( #398,797 of 1,410,182 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #177,870 of 1,410,182 )
How can I increase my downloads?