What Concept Analysis in Philosophy of Science Should Be

Authors
C. Kenneth Waters
University of Calgary
Abstract
What should philosophers of science accomplish when they analyze scientific concepts and interpret scientific knowledge? What is concept analysis if it is not a description of the way scientists actually think? I investigate these questions by using Hans Reichenbach's account of the descriptive, critical, and advisory tasks of philosophy of science to examine Karola Stotz and Paul Griffiths' idea that poll-based methodologies can test philosophical analyses of scientific concepts. Using Reichenbach's account as a point of departure, I argue that philosophy of science should identify and clarify epistemic virtues and describe scientific knowledge in relation to these virtues. The role of concept analysis is to articulate scientific concepts in ways that help reveal epistemic virtues and limitations of particular sciences. This means an analysis of the gene concept should help clarify the explanatory power and limitations of gene-based explanations, and should help account for the investigative utility and biases of gene-centered sciences. I argue that a philosophical analysis of gene concept that helps achieve these critical aims should not be rejected on the basis of poll-based studies even if such studies could show that professional biologists don't actually use gene terminology in precise ways corresponding to the philosophical analysis
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

Our Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 36,609
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

Experimental Philosophy of Biology: Notes From the Field.Karola Stotz - 2009 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 40 (2):233-237.
Re-Examining the Gene in Personalized Genomics.Jordan Bartol - 2013 - Science & Education 22 (10):2529-2546.
Artificial Language Philosophy of Science.Sebastian Lutz - 2011 - European Journal for Philosophy of Science 2 (2):181–203.

View all 6 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Experimental Philosophy of Science.Paul E. Griffiths & Karola Stotz - 2008 - Philosophy Compass 3 (3):507–521.
The Referential Convergence of Gene Concepts Based on Classical and Molecular Analyses.Tudor M. Baetu - 2010 - International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 24 (4):411-427.
Genes Made Molecular.C. Kenneth Waters - 1994 - Philosophy of Science 61 (2):163-185.
On the Concept of Sexual Perversion.Kristie Miller - 2010 - Philosophical Quarterly 60 (241):808-830.
Mathematical and Philosophical Analyses.Robert Rogers - 1964 - Philosophy of Science 31 (3):255-264.
Genes: Philosophical Analyses Put to the Test.Karola Stotz & Paul Griffiths - 2004 - History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences 26 (1):5-28.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2010-08-10

Total downloads
84 ( #78,966 of 2,304,030 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
4 ( #153,960 of 2,304,030 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Monthly downloads

My notes

Sign in to use this feature