The future won’t be pretty: The nature and value of ugly, AI-designed experiments

In Milena Ivanova & Alice Murphy, The Aesthetics of Scientific Experiments. New York, NY: Routledge (2023)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Can an ugly experiment be a good experiment? Philosophers have identified many beautiful experiments and explored ways in which their beauty might be connected to their epistemic value. In contrast, the present chapter seeks out (and celebrates) ugly experiments. Among the ugliest are those being designed by AI algorithms. Interestingly, in the contexts where such experiments tend to be deployed, low aesthetic value correlates with high epistemic value. In other words, ugly experiments can be good. Given this, we should conclude that beauty is not generally necessary or sufficient for epistemic value, and increasing beauty will not generally tend to increase epistemic value.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive

External links

  • This entry has no external links. Add one.
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

The aesthetic value of scientific experiments.Milena Ivanova - 2023 - In Milena Ivanova & Alice Murphy, The Aesthetics of Scientific Experiments. New York, NY: Routledge.
The aesthetics of scientific experiments.Milena Ivanova - 2021 - Philosophy Compass 16 (3):e12730.
Profound experiments.Alice Murphy - 2023 - In Milena Ivanova & Alice Murphy, The Aesthetics of Scientific Experiments. New York, NY: Routledge.
The Empirical Case for Moral Beauty.Panos Paris - 2018 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 96 (4):642-656.
Scientific experiments beyond surprise and beauty.Anatolii Kozlov - 2023 - European Journal for Philosophy of Science 13 (3):1-22.
Thought Experiment more geometric.Daria Drozdova - 2016 - Epistemology and Philosophy of Science 49 (3):43-47.
Ugly Analyses and Value.Michael R. DePaul - 2009 - In Adrian Haddock, Alan Millar & Duncan Pritchard, Epistemic value. New York: Oxford University Press.
Experiments, Simulations, and Epistemic Privilege.Emily C. Parke - 2014 - Philosophy of Science 81 (4):516-536.

Analytics

Added to PP
2023-08-13

Downloads
531 (#56,921)

6 months
186 (#20,920)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Michael T. Stuart
University of York

Citations of this work

Aesthetic Considerations in the Development of Plate Tectonics.Mariona Miyata-Sturm - forthcoming - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 108:1-9.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Beauty & revolution in science.James William McAllister - 1996 - Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
How Thought Experiments Increase Understanding.Michael T. Stuart - 2017 - In Michael T. Stuart, Yiftach Fehige & James Robert Brown, The Routledge Companion to Thought Experiments. London: Routledge. pp. 526-544.
What is a Beautiful Experiment?Milena Ivanova - 2022 - Erkenntnis 88 (8):3419-3437.
Insightful artificial intelligence.Marta Halina - 2021 - Mind and Language 36 (2):315-329.

View all 14 references / Add more references