Summary
An overview is provided of how the concept of the thought experiment has developed and changed for the natural sciences in the course of the 20th century. First, we discuss the existing definitions of the term ‘thought experiment’ and the origin of the thought experimentation method, identifying it in Greek Presocratics epoch. Second, only in the end of the 19th century showed up the first systematic enquiry on thought experiments by Ernst Mach’s work. After the Mach’s work, a negative attitude towards thought experiments came in the beginning of the 20th century, which went on until the Thomas Kuhn’s and Karl Popper’s work on thought experiments. Only from the mid-1980s did thought experiments begin to be considered relevant to scientific enterprise. Finally, we show the existing empirical and ‘functional’ theories which have developed about the nature and purpose of thought experiments.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Bealer, G.: 1998, ‘Intuition and the Autonomy of Philosophy’, in: M. R. De Paul and W. Ramsey (eds), Rethinking Intuition: The Psychology of Intuition and Its Role in Philosophical Inquiry, Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, Inc., Lanham, Maryland.
Brown, J.R.: 1986, ‘Thought Experiments Since the Scientific Revolution’, International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 1, 1–15.
Brown, J.R.: 1987, ‘Einstein's Brand of Verificationism’, International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 2, 33–54.
Brown, J.R.: 1991, The Laboratory of the Mind: Thought Experiments in the Natural Sciences, Routledge, London-New York.
Brown, J.R.: 1993, ‘Why Empiricism won't Work’, in: D. Hull, M. Forbes and K. Okruhlik (eds), PSA: Proceedings of the 1992 Biennal Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association, Vol. 2, PSA, East Lansing, MI.
Cole, D.: 1984, ‘Thought and Thought Experiments’, Philosophical Studies 45, 431–444.
Duhem, P.: 1914/1954, The Aim and Structure of Physical Science. Translated from the French, 2nd edition of 1914 by P. Weiner (Princeton University Press, Princeton/New Jersey.
Forge, J.: 1991, ‘Thought Experiments in the Philosophy of Physical Science’, in: Horowitz and Massey.
Gendler, T.S.: 1998, ‘Galileo and the Indispensability of Scientific Thought Experiments’, British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 49, 397–424.
Gentner, D. and Stevens, A.: 1983, Mental Models, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ.
Gooding, D.: 1992, ‘The Procedural Turn, or why do Thought Experiments Work?’ in: R. Giere (ed), Cognitive Models of Science, Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science 15, University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis.
Gooding, D.: 1993, ‘What is Experimental about Thought Experiments?’, in: D. Hull, M. Forbes and K. Okruhlik (eds), PSA: Proceedings of the 1992 Biennal Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association, Vol. 2, PSA, East Lansing, MI.
Helm, H. and Gilbert, J.: 1985, ‘Thought Experiments and Physics Education-part 1’, Physics Education 20, 124–131.
Helm, H., Gilbert, J. and Watts, M.D.: 1985, ‘Thought Experiments and Physics Education-part 2’, Physics Education 20, 211–217.
Horowitz, T. And Massey, G.J. (eds): 1991, Thought Experiments in Science and Philosophy, Rowman and Littlefield, Savage/ Maryland.
Irvine, A.D.: 1991, ‘On the Nature of Thought Experiments in Scientific Reasoning’, in: Horowitz and Massey.
Kuhn, T.S.: 1962/1970, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, 2nd edition, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Kuhn, T.S.: 1964/1977, ‘A Function for Thought Experiments’, in: T.S. Kuhn, The Essential Tension, 2nd edition, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Lakatos, I.: 1976, Proofs and Refutations: The Logic of Mathematical Discovery, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Laymon, R.: 1991, ‘Thought Experiments of Stevin, Mach and Gouy: Thought Experiments as Ideal Limits and as Semantic Domains’, in: Horowitz and Massey.
Mach, E.: 1883/1960, Die Mechanik in Ihrer Entwicklung. Historisch - kritisch dargestellt. Translated by T. J. Mc Cormack, The Science of Mechanics, 6th edition, Open Court Publishers, La Salle/ Illinois.
Mach, E.:1896/1897, ‘Über Gedankenexperimente’, Zeitschrift für den physikalischen und chemischen Unterricht, 10, 1–5.
Mach, E.: 1905/1976, ‘Über Gedankenexperimente’, in: E. Mach, Erkenntnis und Irrtum. Translated by T. J. Mc Cormack and P. Foulkes as Knowledge and Error, D. Reidel, Dordrecht/the Netherlands.
Mc Mullin, E.: 1985, ‘Galilean Idealization’, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 16, 247–273.
Miscevic, N.: 1992, ‘Mental Models and Thought Experiments’, International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 6, 215–226.
Myers, M.C.: 1986, ‘Analytical Thought Experiments’, Metaphilosophy, 17, 109–118.
Nersessian, N.J.: 1988, ‘Reasoning from Imagery And Analogy in Scientific Concept Formation’, in: A. Fine and J. Leplin (eds), PSA: Proceedings of the 1988 Biennal Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association, PSA, East Lansing/MI.
Nersessian, N.J.: 1992, ‘How do Scientists Think? Capturing the Dynamics of Conceptual Change in Science’, in: R. Giere (ed), Cognitive Models of Science, Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science 15, University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis.
Nersessian, N.J.: 1993, ‘In the Theoretician's Laboratory: Thought Experiments as Mental Modeling’, in: D. Hull, M. Forbes and K. Okruhlik (eds), PSA: Proceedings of the 1992 Biennal Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association, Vol. 2, PSA, East Lansing/MI.
Norton, J.D.: 1991, ‘Thought Experiments in Einstein's Work’, in: Horowitz and Massey.
Norton, J.D.: 1993, ‘Seeing the Laws of Nature’, Metascience 3, 33–38.
Norton, J.D.: 1996, ‘Are Thought Experiments Just what you Thought?’, Canadian Journal of Philosophy 26(3), 333–366.
Palmer, A.: 1984, ‘The Limits of AI: Thought Experiments and Conceptual Investigations’, in: S. Torrance (ed), The Mind and the Machine: Philosophical Aspects of Artificial Intelligence, Horwood, Chichester.
Popper, K.R.: 1934/1959, ‘On the Use and Misuse of Imaginary Experiments’, in: K. Popper, The Logic of Scientific Discovery, 2nd edition, Routledge, New York and London (originally published as Logik der Forschung, Vienna 1934/5).
Popper, K.R.: 1963/1996, Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge, 5th edition, Routledge and Kegan Paul, London.
Prudovsky, G.: 1989, ‘The Confirmation of the Superposition Principle: The Role of a Constructive Thought Experiment in Galileo's Discorsi’, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 20, 453–468.
Reichenbach, H.: 1938, Experience and Prediction, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Rescher, N.: 1991, ‘Thought Experimentation in Presocratic Philosophy’, in: Horowitz and Massey.
Schildknecht, C.: 1990, Philosophische Masken: Literarische Formen der Philosophie bei Platon, Descartes, Wolff und Lichtenberg, Metzler, Stuttgart/Germany.
Shea, W.R.: 1977, ‘Galileo and the Justification of Experiments’, in: R. E. Butts and J. Hintikka (eds), Historical and Philosophical Dimensions of Logic, Methodology, and Philosophy of Science, D. Reidel, Dordrecht/the Netherlands.
Sorensen, R.: 1992, Thought Experiments, New York and Oxford, Oxford University Press.
Witt-Hansen, J.: 1976, ‘H.C. Örsted, Immanuel Kant, and the Thought Experiment’, Danish Year Book of Philosophy 13, 48–65.
Wilkes, K.V.: 1988, Real People: Personal Identity without Thought Experiments, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Moue, A.S., Masavetas, K.A. & Karayianni, H. Tracing the Development of Thought Experiments in the Philosophy of Natural Sciences. J Gen Philos Sci 37, 61–75 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10838-006-8906-8
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10838-006-8906-8