David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jonathan Jenkins Ichikawa
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
In this paper, I address the issue of to what extent the theory-dominated view of scientific experimentation describes scientific practice. I rely on a time period from the history of High Energy Physics (HEP), which spans from early 1960s to early 1970s. I argue that theory-ladenness of experimentation (TLE), which grounds theory-dominated conception of experimentation is too coarse-grained inasmuch as it prevents us from seeing the correct relationship that exists between theorizing and experimenting in the scientific practice of HEP. I articulate that in order to be able to get a better understanding of scientific practice, a revision needs to be made in the general conception of TLE. I propose that such a revision is possible if we abandon the commitment that experimentation is always driven by theory. I consider what I call “theory-drivenness” of experimentation (TDE) as a form of theory-ladenness, which amounts to the claim that experiments, from their initial design up to their final stage, are carried out under the framework of a prevailing theory for the purpose of providing definite answers to specific questions already posed by the same theory. I argue that electron-proton inelastic scattering experiments in HEP were firstly carried out without having any recourse to a phenomenological model. From here, I claim that these experiments are not theory-laden in the sense implied by TDE. On the other hand, I argue, inelastic scattering experiments are theory-laden due to the fact that the scientists who perform them are committed to background theories of HEP. That is, I admit the validity of TLE as a philosophical claim, but I attribute a weaker status to it as opposed to its general conception. That is, I propose to differentiate TDE from TLE by claiming that TLE does not entail TDE.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
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.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Jeffrey A. Barrett (2000). The Persistence of Memory: Surreal Trajectories in Bohm's Theory. Philosophy of Science 67 (4):680-703.
Jon McGinnis (2003). Scientific Methodologies in Medieval Islam. Journal of the History of Philosophy 41 (3):307-327.
Julia Tanner (2011). Rowlands, Rawlsian Justice and Animal Experimentation. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 14 (5):569-587.
Maureen O'Malley (2007). Exploratory Experimentation and Scientific Practice: Metagenomics and the Proteorhodopsin Case. History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences 29 (3):337 - 360.
Jonathan Bain (2013). Effective Field Theories. In Robert Batterman (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Physics. Oup Usa. pp. 224.
Friedrich Steinle (1997). Entering New Fields: Exploratory Uses of Experimentation. Philosophy of Science 64 (4):74.
C. Kenneth Waters (2007). The Nature and Context of Exploratory Experimentation: An Introduction to Three Case Studies of Exploratory Research. History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences 29 (3):275 - 284.
Michael J. Hones (1991). Scientific Realism and Experimental Practice in High-Energy Physics. Synthese 86 (1):29 - 76.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads54 ( #90,402 of 1,925,111 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #418,130 of 1,925,111 )
How can I increase my downloads?