{"title":"“科学哲学与科学研究","authors":"Anouk Barberousse","doi":"10.1093/OSO/9780190690649.003.0007","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Science studies have proposed a novel and integrated outlook on scientific activity, to be described in a quasi-anthropological way and without the supposed normative prejudice of most philosophers of science. This chapter examines the stiff competition between philosophy of science and science studies in accounting for what science really is about. This competition is best framed at a methodological level, in particular in terms of the relationship between the study of science and its history. Should one strive for ahistorical generalizations or focus on the irremediably singular low-level interactions that constitute the day-to-day business of scientific life? Should one accept to practice “judged history,” and put past theories in perspective with what we learned to be right and wrong about them, or should one refrain from any such overseeing perspective? The chapter concludes with prospects for accounting from within philosophy of science for the important phenomena that science studies have contributed.","PeriodicalId":55327,"journal":{"name":"British Journal for the Philosophy of Science","volume":"95 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2018-07-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Philosophy of Science and Science Studies\",\"authors\":\"Anouk Barberousse\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/OSO/9780190690649.003.0007\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Science studies have proposed a novel and integrated outlook on scientific activity, to be described in a quasi-anthropological way and without the supposed normative prejudice of most philosophers of science. This chapter examines the stiff competition between philosophy of science and science studies in accounting for what science really is about. This competition is best framed at a methodological level, in particular in terms of the relationship between the study of science and its history. Should one strive for ahistorical generalizations or focus on the irremediably singular low-level interactions that constitute the day-to-day business of scientific life? Should one accept to practice “judged history,” and put past theories in perspective with what we learned to be right and wrong about them, or should one refrain from any such overseeing perspective? The chapter concludes with prospects for accounting from within philosophy of science for the important phenomena that science studies have contributed.\",\"PeriodicalId\":55327,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"British Journal for the Philosophy of Science\",\"volume\":\"95 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-07-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"British Journal for the Philosophy of Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/OSO/9780190690649.003.0007\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal for the Philosophy of Science","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/OSO/9780190690649.003.0007","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
Science studies have proposed a novel and integrated outlook on scientific activity, to be described in a quasi-anthropological way and without the supposed normative prejudice of most philosophers of science. This chapter examines the stiff competition between philosophy of science and science studies in accounting for what science really is about. This competition is best framed at a methodological level, in particular in terms of the relationship between the study of science and its history. Should one strive for ahistorical generalizations or focus on the irremediably singular low-level interactions that constitute the day-to-day business of scientific life? Should one accept to practice “judged history,” and put past theories in perspective with what we learned to be right and wrong about them, or should one refrain from any such overseeing perspective? The chapter concludes with prospects for accounting from within philosophy of science for the important phenomena that science studies have contributed.
期刊介绍:
The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science encourages the application of philosophical techniques to issues raised by the natural and human sciences. These include general questions of scientific knowledge and objectivity, as well as more particular problems arising within specific disciplines.
Topics currently being discussed in the journal include: causation, the logic of natural selection, the interpretation of quantum mechanics, the direction of time, probability, confirmation, foundations of mathematics, supertasks and the theory of emotion.