What Does History Matter to Philosophy of Science? The Concept of Replication and the Methodology of Experiments
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Journal of the Philosophy of History 5 (3):513-532 (2011)
Scientists and philosophers generally agree that the replication of experiments is a key ingredient of good and successful scientific practice. “One-offs“ are not significant; experiments must be replicable to be considered valid and important. But the term “replication“ has been used in a number of ways, and it is therefore quite difficult to appraise the meaning and significance of replications. I consider how history may help - and has helped - with this task. I propose that: 1) Studies of past scientific episodes in historical context and of recent philosophical contributions to the discussion are heuristic tools for exploring and clarifying the meaning of that concept. 2) The analysis of the development of the methodological imperative of replication sheds light on the significance scientists have attached to it, thereby contributing further to the clarification of the concept. 3) The analysis of the history of philosophical thought about methods and scientific methodology helps understand why philosophers have not paid much attention to the analysis of the concept of replication
|Keywords||experiment replication scientific methodology|
|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
Jutta Schickore (2011). The Significance of Re-Doing Experiments: A Contribution to Historically Informed Methodology. [REVIEW] Erkenntnis 75 (3):325-347.
Christian Sichau (2000). Die Joule-Thomson-Experimente—Anmerkungen zur Materialität eines Experimentes. NTM International Journal of History and Ethics of Natural Sciences, Technology and Medicine 8 (1):222-243.
Bence Nanay (2011). Replication Without Replicators. Synthese 179 (455):477.
H. M. Collins (1985). Changing Order: Replication and Induction in Scientific Practice. University of Chicago Press.
James R. Wible (1992). Fraud in Science an Economic Approach. Philosophy of the Social Sciences 22 (1):5-27.
Kurt Bayertz (1991). Forschungsprogramm Und Wissenschaftsentwicklung. Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 22 (2):229 - 243.
Patrick Suppes (1984). Philosophy of Science and Public Policy. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1984:3 - 13.
Michael Mulkay & G. Nigel Gilbert (1986). Replication and Mere Replication. Philosophy of the Social Sciences 16 (1):21-37.
B. Nanay (2002). The Return of the Replicator: What is Philosophically Signiﬁcant in a General Account of Replication and Selection? [REVIEW] Biology and Philosophy (1):109-121.
Katerina Ierodiakonou & Sophie Roux (eds.) (2011). Thought Experiments in Methodological and Historical Contexts. Brill.
Floris Heukelom (2011). How Validity Travelled to Economic Experimenting. Journal of Economic Methodology 18 (1):13-28.
Hans Radder (1992). Experimental Reproducibility and the Experimenters' Regress. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1992:63 - 73.
Added to index2011-12-06
Total downloads45 ( #92,480 of 1,902,195 )
Recent downloads (6 months)10 ( #73,797 of 1,902,195 )
How can I increase my downloads?