Abstract
History and philosophy complement and overlap each other in subject matter, but the two disciplines exhibit conflict over methodology. Since Hempel's challenge to historians that they should adopt the covering law model of explanation, the methodological conflict has revolved around the respective roles of the general and the particular in each discipline. In recent years, the revival of narrativism in history, coupled with the trend in philosophy of science to rely upon case studies, joins the methodological conflict anew. So long as contemporary philosophy of science relies upon history's methodology to construct its case studies, it subjects itself to a paradoxical situation: the better the history, the worse the philosophy. An example of the methodological conflict is presented in the case of Antoine Lavoisier. This example also serves our ultimateconclusion, which is that distinctively philosophical methods of case-study design promise enhanced prescriptive powers for philosophy of science.
Similar content being viewed by others
REFERENCES
Aydelotte, William O.: 1986, 'Notes on Historical Generalization', pp. 145-178 in Gottschalk, Louis. (ed.) Generalization in the Writing of History. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Ankersmit, F.R.: 1986, 'The Dilemma of Contemporary Anglo-Saxon Philosophy of History', pp. 1-27 in Ankersmit, F.R. (ed.) History and Theory 25 Knowing and Telling History: The Anglo-Saxon Debate. Middlebury CT: Wesleyan University Press.
Buck, R.C. and Cohen, R.S. (eds.): 1971, PSA 1970 (Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science. v. 8). Dordrecht: D. Reidel.
Burian, R.M.: 1977, 'More Than a Marriage of Convenience: On the Inextricability of History and Philosophy of Science', Philosophy of Science 44, 1-42.
Butterfield, Herbert: 1935, The Whig Interpretation of History. New York: W.W. Norton.
Butts, Robert and Hintikka, Jakko (eds.).: 1977, Historical and Philosophical Dimensions of Logic, Methodology and Philosophy of Science. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.
Croce, Benedetto: 1951, Primi Saggi. 3rd Ed. Bari: G. Laterza and Figli.
Dijksterhuis, E. J.: 1961, The Mechanization of the World Picture. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Donovan, Arthur, Larry Laudan and Rachel Laudan (eds.): 1988, Scrutinizing Science: Empirical Studies of Scientific Change. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Donovan, Arthur: 1994, Antoine Lavoisier. Science, Administration, and Revolution. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell's Ltd.
Fay, Brian, Golob, Eigene O., and Richard T. Vann (eds.): 1987, Louis O. Mink Historical Understanding. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
Finocchiaro, Maurice: 1973, History of Science as Explanation. Wayne State University Press, Detroit.
Gale, George: 1979, Theory of Science. McGraw-Hill, New York.
Giere, R.N.: 1973, 'History and Philosophy of Science: Intimate Relationship or Marriage of Convenience', The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 24, 282-297.
Gooding, David: 1997, 'Review of Jed Z. Buchwald (ed.) Scientific Practice: Theories and Stories of Doing Physics, Isis 88, 121-122.
Gottschalk, Louis: 1963, Generalization in the Writing of History. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Harding, Sandra: 1992, 'Rethinking Standpoint Epistemology: What is 'Strong Objectivity?', The Centennial Review 36, 437-470.
Harman, Gilbert (ed.): 1974, On Noam Chomsky: Critical Essays. Anchor Press, New York.
Hempel, Carl G.: 1942, 'The Function of General Laws in History', Journal of Philosophy 39, 35-48.
Itzik, Gurol: 1996, 'Was There a Post-Positivist Revolution?', presented at the First International History of Philosophy of Science Conference, 21-24 April, Roanoke VA.
Kitcher, Philip: 1994, 'The Naturalists Return', Journal of Philosophy 101, 58-75.
Koertke, Noretta: 1998, A House Built on Sand. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Kragh, Helge: 1996, Cosmology and Controversy, Princeton University Press, Princeton.
Kremer, Richard, L: 1994, 'Experimentalist's Career', Science 266, 1890-1891.
Lakatos, Imre: 1970, 'Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes', pp. 91-196 in Lakatos and Musgrave (eds.), Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Lakatos, Imre: 1971, 'History of Science and its Rational Reconstruction', pp. 91-136 in Buck, R.C. and Cohen, R.S. (eds.), PSA 1970 (Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science, v. 8). D. Reidel, Dordrecht.
Lakatos, Imre and Musgrave, Alan (eds.): 1970, Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Laudan, Larry: 1977, 'The Sources of Modern Methodology', pp. 3-19 in Butts and Hintikka (eds.), Historical and Philosophical Dimensions of Logic, Methodology and Philosophy of Science. D. Reidel, Dordrecht.
Laudan, Larry and Jarret, Leplin: 1991, 'Empirical Equivalence and Underdetermination', Journal of Philosophy 88, 499-490.
Lennox, James: 1996, 'Nature Does Nothing in Vain', presented at the Pittsburgh Center for Philosophy of Science's Third Quadrennial International Fellows Conference, 20-24 May, Castiglioncello, Italy.
McCullagh, C. Behan: 1987, 'The Truth of Historical Narratives', pp. 30-46 in History and Theory 26: The Representation of Historical Events. Westeyan University Press, Middletown CT.
Mink, Louis: 1973, 'The Divergence of History and Sociology in Recent Philosophy of History', pp. 163-181 in Fay, Brian; Golob, Eugene O., and Richard T. Vann (eds.), Louis O. Mink Historical Understanding. Cornell University Press, Ithaca.
Murphey, Murray G.: 1986, 'Explanation, Causes, and Covering Laws', pp. 43-57 in Ankersmit, F.R. (ed.), History and Theory 25: Knowing and Telling History: The Anglo-Saxon Debate. Wesleyan University Press, Middlebury CT.
Murphey, Murray G.: 1994, Philosophical Foundations of Historical Knowledge. State University of New York Press, Albany.
Nickles, Thomas: 1995, 'Philosophy of Science and History of Science', pp. 139-163 in Thackery, Arnold (ed.), Osiris 10: Constructing Knowledge in the History of Science.
Norton, John D.: 1995, 'The Force of Newtonian Cosmology', presented at the 4th International Conference on the History of General Relativity, 31 July-3 August, Berlin.
Pinnick, Cassandra, L.: 1994, 'Feminist Epistemology: Implications for Philosophy of Science', Philosophy of Science 61, 646-657.
Pinnick, Cassandra L.: 1998, 'What's Wrong With the Strong Programme's Case Study of the Hobbes-Boyle Dispute?', pp. 227-239 in Koertke, Noretta (ed.) A House Built on Sand. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Porter, Dale H.: 1981, The Emergence of the Past: A Theory of Historical Explanation. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Roberts, Clayton: 1996, The Logic of Historical Explanation. Pennsylvania State University Press, University Park PA.
Searle, John: 1974, 'Chomsky's Revolution in Linguistics', pp. 2-33 in Harman, Gilbert (ed.) 1974. On Noam Chomsky: Critical Essays. Anchor Press, New York.
Shanks, Niall and Hugh LaFollette: 1994, 'Animal Experimentation: The Legacy of Claude Bernard', International Studies in The Philosophy of Science 8, 195-210.
Sonnert, G. and Holton, G.: 1996, 'Career Patterns of Women and Men in the Sciences', American Scientist 84, 63-72.
Sulloway, Frank J.: 1996, Born to Rebel. Birth Order, Family Dynamics, and Creative Lives. Pantheon Books, New York.
Thackery, Arnold (ed.): 1995, Osiris 10: Constructing Knowledge in the History of Science. University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Walsh, W. H.: 1951, An Introduction to the Philosophy of History. Hutchinson's University Library, London.
Wenneras, Christine, and Wold, Agnes: 1997, 'Nepotism and Sexism in Peer Review', Nature 387, 341-343.
White, Hayden: 1987, The Content of the Form. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Pinnick, C., Gale, G. Philosophy of Science and History of Science: A Troubling Interaction. Journal for General Philosophy of Science 31, 109–125 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008353021407
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008353021407