David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Biology and Philosophy 15 (3):443-463 (2000)
One of the principal difficulties in assessing Science as aProcess (Hull 1988) is determining the relationship between the various elements of Hull's theory. In particular, it is hard to understand precisely how conceptual selection is related to Hull's account of the social dynamics of science. This essay aims to clarify the relation between these aspects of his theory by examining his discussion of the``demic structure'' of science. I conclude that the social account cando significant explanatory work independently of the selectionistaccount. Further, I maintain that Hull's treatment of the demicstructure of science points us toward an important set of issues insocial epistemology. If my reading of Science as a Process iscorrect, then most of Hull's critics (e.g., those who focus solelyon his account of conceptual selection) have ignored promisingaspects of his theory.
|Keywords||David Hull evolution selection|
|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
Paulo Abrantes & Charbel Niño El-Hani (2009). Gould, Hull, and the Individuation of Scientific Theories. Foundations of Science 14 (4):295-313.
Similar books and articles
John S. Wilkins (2008). The Adaptive Landscape of Science. Biology and Philosophy 23 (5):659-671.
Carlos Mariscal (2011). Epistemology, Necessity, and Evolution: A Critical Review of Michael Ruse's Philosophy After Darwin. Biology and Philosophy 26 (3):449-457.
Noretta Koertge (1990). The Function of Credit in Hull's Evolutionary Model of Science. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1990:237 - 244.
Kim J. Vicente (2000). Is Science an Evolutionay Process? Evidence From Miscitation of the Scientific Literature. Perspectives on Science 8 (1):53-69.
Alex Rosenberg (1992). Selection and Science: Critical Notice of David Hull's Science as a Process. [REVIEW] Biology and Philosophy 7 (2):217-228.
Ron Amundson & Laurence D. Smith (1984). Clark Hull, Robert Cummins, and Functional Analysis. Philosophy of Science 51 (December):657-666.
Kai Hahlweg (1988). Epistemology or Not? An Inquiry Into David Hull's Evolutionary Account of the Social and Conceptual Development of Science. Biology and Philosophy 3 (2):187-192.
David L. Hull (2000). Science and Selection: Essays on Biological Evolution and the Philosophy of Science. Cambridge University Press.
Todd Grantham (1994). Does Science Have a “Global Goal?”: A Critique of Hull's View of Conceptual Progress. [REVIEW] Biology and Philosophy 9 (1):85-97.
Eugenie Gatens-Robinson (1993). Why Falsification is the Wrong Paradigm for Evolutionary Epistemology: An Analysis of Hull's Selection Theory. Philosophy of Science 60 (4):535-557.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads85 ( #49,577 of 1,906,955 )
Recent downloads (6 months)5 ( #162,336 of 1,906,955 )
How can I increase my downloads?