David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal for General Philosophy of Science 31 (1):109-125 (2000)
History and philosophy complement and overlap each other in subject matter, but the two disciplines exhibit conflict over methodology. Since Hempel's challenge to historians that they should adopt the covering law model of explanation, the methodological conflict has revolved around the respective roles of the general and the particular in each discipline. In recent years, the revival of narrativism in history, coupled with the trend in philosophy of science to rely upon case studies, joins the methodological conflict anew. So long as contemporary philosophy of science relies upon history's methodology to construct its case studies, it subjects itself to a paradoxical situation: the better the history, the worse the philosophy. An example of the methodological conflict is presented in the case of Antoine Lavoisier. This example also serves our ultimateconclusion, which is that distinctively philosophical methods of case-study design promise enhanced prescriptive powers for philosophy of science.
|Keywords||methodology philosophy of history historiography case-history method interdisciplinary (philosophy history)|
|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
Jutta Schickore (2009). Studying Justificatory Practice: An Attempt to Integrate the History and Philosophy of Science. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 23 (1):85-107.
Jutta Schickore (2011). More Thoughts on HPS: Another 20 Years Later. Perspectives on Science 19 (4):453-481.
Theodore Arabatzis & Jutta Schickore (2012). Ways of Integrating History and Philosophy of Science. Perspectives on Science 20 (4):395-408.
Andreas Bartels (2010). Explaining Referential Stability of Physics Concepts: The Semantic Embedding Approach. [REVIEW] Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 41 (2):267 - 281.
Similar books and articles
N. Tosh (2003). Anachronism and Retrospective Explanation: In Defence of a Present-Centred History of Science. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 34 (3):647-659.
A. Cornelius Benjamin (1960). Is the Philosophy of Science Scientific? Philosophy of Science 27 (4):351-358.
Lorenz Krüger, Thomas Sturm, Wolfgang Carl & Lorraine Daston (eds.) (2005). Why Does History Matter to Philosophy and the Sciences? Walter DeGruyter.
Massimo Pigliucci (2010). Nonsense on Stilts: How to Tell Science From Bunk. University of Chicago Press.
Klaus Hentschel (2003). Der Vergleich AlS Brücke Zwischen Wissenschaftsgeschichte Und Wissenschaftstheorie. Journal for General Philosophy of Science 34 (2):251-275.
John Losee (1987). Philosophy of Science and Historical Enquiry. Oxford University Press.
Michael R. Matthews (1994). Science Teaching: The Role of History and Philosophy of Science. Routledge.
John F. W. Herschel (1830/1987). A Preliminary Discourse on the Study of Natural Philosophy. University of Chicago Press.
Nancy L. Maull (1976). Reconstructed Science as Philosophical Evidence. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1976:119 - 129.
F. Michael Akeroyd (2002). Philosophy of Science and History3 of Science: A Non Troubling Interaction. [REVIEW] Journal for General Philosophy of Science 33 (1):159-162.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads24 ( #61,046 of 1,089,094 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #69,982 of 1,089,094 )
How can I increase my downloads?