Real Science: What It is, and What It Means
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Cambridge University Press (2000)
Scientists and 'anti-scientists' alike need a more realistic image of science. The traditional mode of research, academic science, is not just a 'method': it is a distinctive culture, whose members win esteem and employment by making public their findings. Fierce competition for credibility is strictly regulated by established practices such as peer review. Highly specialized international communities of independent experts form spontaneously and generate the type of knowledge we call 'scientific' - systematic, theoretical, empirically-tested, quantitative, and so on. Ziman shows that these familiar 'philosophical' features of scientific knowledge are inseparable from the ordinary cognitive capabilities and peculiar social relationships of its producers. This wide-angled close-up of the natural and human sciences recognizes their unique value, whilst revealing the limits of their rationality, reliability, and universal applicability. It also shows how, for better or worse, the new 'post-academic' research culture of teamwork, accountability, etc. is changing these supposedly eternal philosophical characteristics.
|Keywords||Science Philosophy Science Methodology|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Buy the book||$5.53 used (97% off) $71.14 new (52% off) $127.59 direct from Amazon (14% off) Amazon page|
|Call number||Q175.Z547 2000|
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
Bernadette Bensaude-Vincent, Sacha Loeve, Alfred Nordmann & Astrid Schwarz (2011). Matters of Interest: The Objects of Research in Science and Technoscience. [REVIEW] Journal for General Philosophy of Science 42 (2):365-383.
Melissa S. Anderson, Emily A. Ronning, Raymond De Vries & Brian C. Martinson (2007). The Perverse Effects of Competition on Scientists' Work and Relationships. Science and Engineering Ethics 13 (4):437-461.
Sacha Loeve (2012). From Setting the Distance to Adjusting the Focus. Metascience 22 (1):1-6.
Kåre Nielsen, Trond Åm & Rune Nydal (2011). Centre and Periphery of Nano—A Norwegian Context. NanoEthics 5 (1):87-98.
Gitte Meyer & Peter Sandøe (2012). Going Public: Good Scientific Conduct. Science and Engineering Ethics 18 (2):173-197.
Similar books and articles
Kurt Bayertz (1991). Forschungsprogramm Und Wissenschaftsentwicklung. Journal for General Philosophy of Science 22 (2):229 - 243.
John Ziman (2003). Non-Instrumental Roles of Science. Science and Engineering Ethics 9 (1):17-27.
Raphael Sassower (2005). Science and Culture. Philosophy of the Social Sciences 35 (4):499-508.
Hugo Fjelsted Alrøe & Erik Steen Kristensen (2002). Towards a Systemic Research Methodology in Agriculture: Rethinking the Role of Values in Science. [REVIEW] Agriculture and Human Values 19 (1):3-23.
John Ziman (2001). Getting Scientists to Think About What They Are Doing. Science and Engineering Ethics 7 (2):165-176.
John Ziman (2002). The Continuing Need for Disinterested Research. Science and Engineering Ethics 8 (3):397-399.
J. M. Ziman (1978). Reliable Knowledge: An Exploration of the Grounds for Belief in Science. Cambridge University Press.
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
Added to index2009-01-28
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?