David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jonathan Jenkins Ichikawa
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Science and Engineering Ethics 7 (1):77-104 (2001)
The fairy tale The Three Princes of Serendip can be taken to be allegorical of not only chance discovery (serendipity) but of other aspects of scientific discovery as well. Just as Horace Walpole coined serendipity, so can the term bahramdipity be derived from the tale and defined as the cruel suppression of a serendipitous discovery. Suppressed, unpublished discoveries are designated nulltiples. Several examples are presented to make the case that bahramdipity is an existent aspect of scientific discovery. Other examples of non-ideal scientific research and discovery are provided in order to contrast and clarify the meaning and use of bahramdipity. Additional allegories of scientific discovery are taken from the tale and a hope for the strengthening of scientific integrity is expressed
|Keywords||bahram ethics folklore mythology (Persian, Greek) serendipity Three Princes of Serendip|
|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
Bruno Latour (1987). Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers Through Society. Harvard University Press.
Thomas S. Kuhn (1996). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. University of Chicago Press.
Thomas S. Kuhn (1962). The Structure of Scientific Revolutions Vol. The University of Chicago Press.
Robert King Merton (1973). The Sociology of Science: Theoretical and Empirical Investigations. University of Chicago Press.
Citations of this work BETA
Malhar N. Kumar (2008). A Review of the Types of Scientific Misconduct in Biomedical Research. [REVIEW] Journal of Academic Ethics 6 (3):211-228.
Brian Martin (2015). On the Suppression of Vaccination Dissent. Science and Engineering Ethics 21 (1):143-157.
Stephen Rainey (2012). Enhanced, Improved, Perfected? The New Bioethics 18 (1):21-35.
Similar books and articles
Herbert A. Simon (1973). Does Scientific Discovery Have a Logic? Philosophy of Science 40 (4):471-480.
Pio García (2009). Discovery by Serendipity: A New Context for an Old Riddle. [REVIEW] Foundations of Chemistry 11 (1):33-42.
Andrew Lugg (1985). The Process of Discovery. Philosophy of Science 52 (2):207-220.
Paul Thagard (2002). Curing Cancer? Patrick Lee's Path to the Reovirus Treatment. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 16 (1):79 – 93.
Mario Alai (2004). A.I., Scientific Discovery and Realism. Minds and Machines 14 (1):21-42.
Noretta Koertge (1982). Explaining Scientific Discovery. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1982:14 - 28.
James A. Marcum (2011). Horizon for Scientific Practice: Scientific Discovery and Progress. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 24 (2):187-215.
Francesco Amigoni, Viola Schiaffonati & Marco Somalvico (2000). A Multilevel Architecture of Creative Dynamic Agency. Foundations of Science 5 (2):157-184.
Wei-Min Shen (1995). The Process of Discovery. Foundations of Science 1 (2):233-251.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads27 ( #152,492 of 1,934,389 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #434,207 of 1,934,389 )
How can I increase my downloads?