观察、实验与科学实践

IF 0.7 2区 哲学 Q2 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE
Slobodan Perović
{"title":"观察、实验与科学实践","authors":"Slobodan Perović","doi":"10.1080/02698595.2021.1978038","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Ian Hacking has argued that the notions of experiment and observation are distinct, not even the opposite ends of a continuum. More recently, other authors have emphasised their continuity, saying it is futile to distinguish between them as they belong on a continuum of epistemic activities. I take a middle road by suggesting that in scientific practice, experiment and observation constitute a continuum, but we can identify methodological and pragmatic aspects that define it, as well as various points on it that meaningfully delineate scientific practices. I explain the implications of the location of research projects on the continuum for scientists’ epistemic responsibilities and their ethical and funding concerns.","PeriodicalId":44433,"journal":{"name":"International Studies in the Philosophy of Science","volume":"34 1","pages":"1 - 20"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Observation, Experiment, and Scientific Practice\",\"authors\":\"Slobodan Perović\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/02698595.2021.1978038\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Ian Hacking has argued that the notions of experiment and observation are distinct, not even the opposite ends of a continuum. More recently, other authors have emphasised their continuity, saying it is futile to distinguish between them as they belong on a continuum of epistemic activities. I take a middle road by suggesting that in scientific practice, experiment and observation constitute a continuum, but we can identify methodological and pragmatic aspects that define it, as well as various points on it that meaningfully delineate scientific practices. I explain the implications of the location of research projects on the continuum for scientists’ epistemic responsibilities and their ethical and funding concerns.\",\"PeriodicalId\":44433,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Studies in the Philosophy of Science\",\"volume\":\"34 1\",\"pages\":\"1 - 20\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-01-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Studies in the Philosophy of Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/02698595.2021.1978038\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Studies in the Philosophy of Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02698595.2021.1978038","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

伊恩·哈金认为,实验和观察的概念是截然不同的,甚至不是一个连续体的两端。最近,其他作者强调了它们的连续性,认为区分它们是徒劳的,因为它们属于认知活动的连续体。我采取中间路线,认为在科学实践中,实验和观察构成了一个连续体,但我们可以确定定义它的方法和实用主义方面,以及它的各种有意义地描绘科学实践的点。我解释了研究项目在连续体上的位置对科学家的认知责任及其伦理和资助问题的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Observation, Experiment, and Scientific Practice
ABSTRACT Ian Hacking has argued that the notions of experiment and observation are distinct, not even the opposite ends of a continuum. More recently, other authors have emphasised their continuity, saying it is futile to distinguish between them as they belong on a continuum of epistemic activities. I take a middle road by suggesting that in scientific practice, experiment and observation constitute a continuum, but we can identify methodological and pragmatic aspects that define it, as well as various points on it that meaningfully delineate scientific practices. I explain the implications of the location of research projects on the continuum for scientists’ epistemic responsibilities and their ethical and funding concerns.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
International Studies in the Philosophy of Science
International Studies in the Philosophy of Science HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE-
自引率
12.50%
发文量
10
期刊介绍: International Studies in the Philosophy of Science is a scholarly journal dedicated to publishing original research in philosophy of science and in philosophically informed history and sociology of science. Its scope includes the foundations and methodology of the natural, social, and human sciences, philosophical implications of particular scientific theories, and broader philosophical reflection on science. The editors invite contributions not only from philosophers, historians, and sociologists of science, but also from researchers in the sciences. The journal publishes articles from a wide variety of countries and philosophical traditions.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信