Mario Alai
Skip Abstract Section
Abstract
Epistemologists have debated at length whether scientific discovery is a rational and logical process. If it is, according to the Artificial Intelligence hypothesis, it should be possible to write computer programs able to discover laws or theories; and if such programs were written, this would definitely prove the existence of a logic of discovery. Attempts in this direction, however, have been unsuccessful: the programs written by Simon’s group, indeed, infer famous laws of physics and chemistry; but having found no new law, they cannot properly be considered discovery machines. The programs written in the ‘Turing tradition’, instead, produced new and useful empirical generalization, but no theoretical discovery, thus failing to prove the logical character of the most significant kind of discoveries. A new cognitivist and connectionist approach by Holland, Holyoak, Nisbett and Thagard, looks more promising. Reflection on their proposals helps to understand the complex character of discovery processes, the abandonment of belief in the logic of discovery by logical positivists, and the necessity of a realist interpretation of scientific research.
- Abbott, E. (1953), Flatland, New York: Dover Press.Google Scholar
- Achinstein, P. (1980), 'Discovery and Rule-Books', in T. Nickles, ed., Scientific Discovery, Logic and Rationality, Dordrecht: Reidel, pp. 117-132.Google Scholar
- Aronson, J.L. (1984), A Realist Philosophy of Science, New York: The Macmillan Press.Google Scholar
- Bacon, F. (1620), Novum Organum.Google Scholar
- Braithwaite, R.B. (1953), Scientific Explanation: A Study of the Function of Theory, Probability ant Law in Science, Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Braithwaite, R.B. (1962), 'Models in The Empirical Sciences', in E. Nagel, ed., Logic, Methodology and Philosophy of Science, Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, pp. 224-231.Google Scholar
- Campbell, N.R. (1952<sup>1921</sup>), What is Science? New York: Dover.Google Scholar
- Campbell, N.R. (1957<sup>1919</sup>), Foundations of Science. The Philosophy of Theory and Experiment, New York: Dover.Google Scholar
- Curd, M. (1980), 'Logic of Discovery: Three Approaches', in T. Nickles ed., Scientific Discovery, Logic, and Rationality, Dordrecht: Reidel, pp. 201-219.Google Scholar
- Fann, K.T. (1970), Peirce's Theory of Abduction, The Hague: Nijhoff.Google Scholar
- Gentner, D, Holyoak, K.J. and Kokinov, B.N. (2001), The Analogical Mind: Perspectives from Cognitive Science, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Gillies, D. (1996), Artificial Intelligence and Scientific Method, Oxford: Oxford University Press. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Hacking, I. (1983), Representing and Intervening, Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Hanson, N.R., (1958), Patterns of Discovery. An Inquiry into the Conceptual Foundations of Science, Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Hempel, C. (1965), Aspects of Scientific Explanation and Other Essays in the Philosophy of Science, New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
- Hempel, C. (1966), Philosophy of the Natural Sciences, Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
- Holland, J., Holyoak, K., Nisbett, R. and Thagard, P. (1986), Induction. Processes of Inference, Learning and Discovery, Cambridge, MA, London: MIT Press. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Holyoak, K.J. and Barnden, J.A., eds. (1994), Analogical Connections, Norwood: Ablex.Google Scholar
- Holyoak, K. and Thagard, P. (1995), Mental Leaps, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Koyré, A. (1961), La révolution astronomique, Paris: Herman.Google Scholar
- Kuhn, T. (1962), The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
- Kuhn, T. (1970), 'Reflections on my Critics', in I. Lakatos and A. Musgrave, eds., Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge, Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Lakatos, I. (1970), 'Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programs', in I. Lakatos and A. Musgrave, eds., Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge, Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Lakatos, I. and Musgrave, A., eds. (1970), Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge, Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
- Langley, P., Simon, H., Bradshaw, G. and Zytkow, J. (1987), Scientific Discovery. Computational Explorations of Creative Processes, Cambridge, MA, London: MIT Press. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Laudan, L. (1980), 'Why Was the Logic of Discovery Abandoned?', in T. Nickles, ed., Scientific Discovery, Logic, and Rationality, Dordrecht: Reidel, pp. 173-183.Google Scholar
- Magnani, L., Nersessian, N.J. and Thagard, P., eds. (1999), Model-Based Reasoning in Scientific Discovery, New York: Kluwer Academic Publishers/Plenum Publishers.Google Scholar
- Mill, J.S. (1843), A System of Logic, Ratiocinative and Inductive, Being a Connected View of the Principles of Evidence and Methods of Investigation, London: Parker.Google Scholar
- Molière, (Poquelin, J.B.) (1673), Le malade imaginaire.Google Scholar
- Newton, I. (1687), Naturalis Philosophiae Principia Mathematica.Google Scholar
- Nickles, T. (1980a), 'Introductory Essay', in T. Nickles, ed., Scientific Discovery, Logic, and Rationality, Dordrecht: Reidel, pp. 1-60.Google Scholar
- Nickles, T., ed. (1980b), Scientific Discovery, Logic, and Rationality, Dordrecht: Reidel.Google Scholar
- Pasquinelli, A. (1964), Nuovi principi di epistemologia, Milano: Feltrinelli.Google Scholar
- Peirce, C.S. (1931-35), Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce, I-VI, in C. Harshorne and P. Weiss, eds., Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
- Peirce, C.S. (1958), Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce, VII-VIII, in A. Burks, ed., Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press,Google Scholar
- Pera, M. (1982), Apologia del Metodo, Bari: Laterza.Google Scholar
- Pera, M. (1991), Scienza e retorica, Bari: Laterza.Google Scholar
- Putnam, H. (1962), 'The Analytic and the Synthetic', in H. Feigl and G. Maxwell, eds., Minnesota Studies in The Philosophy of Science III, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, pp. 350- 397.Google Scholar
- Reichenbach, H. (1961), Experience and Prediction: An Analysis of the Foundations of Science, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
- Searle, J. (1980), 'Minds, Brains and Programs', Behavioral and Brain Sciences III, pp. 417-424.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Thagard, P. (1992), Conceptual Revolutions, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
- Thagard, P. (1996), Mind. Introduction to Cognitive Science, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Thagard, P. (1998), Computational Philosophy of Science, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Turing, A.M. (1969), 'Intelligent Machinery', Report National Physics Laboratory, in B. Meltzer and D. Michie, eds. Machine Intelligence V, Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, pp. 3-23, now in D.C. Ince, ed., (1992), Collected Works of A.M. Turing: Mechanical Intelligence, Amsterdam: North Holland, pp. 107-127.Google Scholar
- Van Fraassen, B. (1980), The Scientific Image, Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Index Terms
- A.I., Scientific Discovery and Realism
Recommendations
Philosophical Aspects of Scientific Discovery: A Historical Survey
DS '98: Proceedings of the First International Conference on Discovery ScienceThis paper is intended as an investigation of scientific discoveries from a philosophical point of view. In the first half of this century, most of philosophers rather concentrated on the logical analysis of science and set the problem of discovery ...
Comments