Authors
Agnes Bolinska
University of South Carolina
Abstract
We have previously argued that historical cases must be rendered canonical before they can plausibly serve as evidence for philosophical claims, where canonicity is established through a process of negotiation among historians and philosophers of science (Bolinska and Martin, 2020). Here, we extend this proposal by exploring how that negotiation might take place in practice. The working stock of historical examples that philosophers tend to employ has long been established informally, and, as a result, somewhat haphazardly. The composition of the historical canon of philosophy of science is therefore path dependent, and cases often become stock examples for reasons tangential to their appropriateness for the purposes at hand. We show how the lack of rigor around the canonization of case studies has muddied the waters in selected philosophical debates. This, in turn, lays the groundwork for proposing ways in which they can be improved.
Keywords Canon formation  Case studies  Confrontation model  Integrated history and philosophy of science  Path dependence
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1016/j.shpsa.2021.07.008
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 63,274
External links

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

The Weirdest People in the World?Joseph Henrich, Steven J. Heine & Ara Norenzayan - 2010 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 33 (2-3):61-83.
Who is a Modeler?Michael Weisberg - 2007 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 58 (2):207-233.
What’s so Special About Model Organisms?Rachel A. Ankeny & Sabina Leonelli - 2011 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 42 (2):313-323.

View all 53 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Path Dependence in the Production of Scientific Knowledge.Mark S. Peacock - 2009 - Social Epistemology 23 (2):105 – 124.
A Model of Path-Dependence in Decisions Over Multiple Propositions.Christian List - 2004 - American Political Science Review 98 (3):495-513.
Why is the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders so Hard to Revise? Path-Dependence and “Lock-in” in Classification.Rachel Cooper - 2015 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 51:1-10.
Institutions.C. Mantzavinos - 2011 - In Ian Jarvie Jesús Zamora-Bonilla (ed.), The SAGE Handbook of the Philosophy of Science. London, Thousand Oaks, New Delhi and Singapore: pp. 399-412.
Historicity and Ecological Restoration.Eric Desjardins - 2015 - Biology and Philosophy 30 (1):77-98.
Brief for an Inclusive Anti‐Canon.Samuel C. Rickless - 2018 - Metaphilosophy 49 (1-2):167-181.
The Canon as Flexible, Normative Fact.Merold Westphal - 1993 - The Monist 76 (4):436-449.
The Collapse of Practice Dependence.Kevin Gray - 2018 - Proceedings of the XXIII World Congress of Philosophy 69:149-159.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2021-08-28

Total views
10 ( #872,065 of 2,448,636 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
10 ( #64,349 of 2,448,636 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes