Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 33 (1):121-36 (2002)
Alison Gopnik and Andrew Meltzoff have argued for a view they call the ‘theory theory’: theory change in science and children are similar. While their version of the theory theory has been criticized for depending on a number of disputed claims, we argue that there is a fundamental problem which is much more basic: the theory theory is multiply ambiguous. We show that it might be claiming that a similarity holds between theory change in children and (i) individual scientists, (ii) a rational reconstruction of a Superscientist, or (iii) the scientiﬁc community. We argue that (i) is false, (ii) is non-empirical (which is problematic since the theory theory is supposed to be a bold empirical hypothesis), and (iii) is either false or doesn’t make enough sense to have a truth-value. We conclude that the theory theory is an interesting failure. Its failure points the way to a full, empirical picture of scientiﬁc development, one that marries a concern with the social dynamics of science to a psychological theory of scientiﬁc cognition. 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved
|Keywords||Change Children Development Science Scientist Theory|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
A Confutation of Convergent Realism.Larry Laudan - 2002 - In Yuri Balashov & Alexander Rosenberg (eds.), Philosophy of Science: Contemporary Readings. Routledge. pp. 211.
Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes.Lakatos Imre - 1970 - In Imre Lakatos & Alan Musgrave (eds.), Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge. Cambridge University Press. pp. 91-195.
The Importance of Models in Theorizing: A Deflationary Semantic View.Stephen M. Downes - 1992 - PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1992:142 - 153.
Citations of this work BETA
Cognitive Individualism and the Child as Scientist Program.Bill Wringe - 2011 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C 42 (4):518-529.
Cognitive Individualism and the Child as Scientist Program.Bill Wringe - 2011 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 42 (4):518-529.
Similar books and articles
Why the Child's Theory of Mind Really is a Theory.Alison Gopnik & H. M. Wellman - 1992 - Mind and Language 7 (1-2):145-71.
How Do Young Children Process Beliefs About Beliefs?: Evidence From Response Latency.Haruo Kikuno, Peter Mitchell & Fenja Ziegler - 2007 - Mind and Language 22 (3):297–316.
Theory Theory to the Max.Stephen P. Stich & Shaun Nichols - 1998 - Mind and Language 13 (3):421-449.
Theories in Children and the Rest of Us.Eric Schwitzgebel - 1996 - Philosophy of Science Association 3 (3):S202-S210.
The Theory Theory Thrice Over: The Child as Scientist, Superscientist or Social Institution?A. M. & M. S. - 2002 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 33 (1):117-132.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads105 ( #44,948 of 2,146,265 )
Recent downloads (6 months)6 ( #120,373 of 2,146,265 )
How can I increase my downloads?
There are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.