Theoria 14 (3):461-488 (1999)

Abstract
The scientist's decision of accepting a given proposition is assumed to be dependent on two factors: the scientist's 'private' information about the value of that statement and the proportion of colleagues who also accept it. This interdependence is modelled in an economic fashion, and it is shown that it may lead to multiple equilibria. The main conclusions are that the evolution of scientific knowledge can be path, dependent, that scientific revolutions can be due to very small changes in the empirical evidence, and that not all possible equilibria are necessarily efficient, neither in the economic nor in the epistemic sense. These inefficiencies, however, can be eliminated if scientists can form coalitions
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI theoria19991434
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: 56,913
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

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Science Studies and the Theory of Games.P. Zamora Bonilla Jesús - 2006 - Perspectives on Science 14 (4):525-557.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP index
2009-01-28

Total views
102 ( #97,377 of 2,409,644 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
6 ( #122,742 of 2,409,644 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes