Sharpening the tools of imagination

被引:0
作者
Michael T. Stuart
机构
[1] National Yang Ming Chiao Tung University,Institute of Philosophy of Mind and Cognition
[2] London School of Economics,Centre for Philosophy of Natural and Social Science
来源
Synthese | / 200卷
关键词
Epistemic tools; Thought experiment; Visualization; Models; Computer simulations; Metaphor; Metaepistemology; Epistemology of science; Epistemological consequentialism; Deontic epistemology; Virtue epistemology; Scientific imagination;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Thought experiments, models, diagrams, computer simulations, and metaphors can all be understood as tools of the imagination. While these devices are usually treated separately in philosophy of science, this paper provides a unified account according to which tools of the imagination are epistemically good insofar as they improve scientific imaginings. Improving scientific imagining is characterized in terms of epistemological consequences: more improvement means better consequences. A distinction is then drawn between tools being good in retrospect, at the time, and in general. In retrospect, tools are evaluated straightforwardly in terms of the quality of their consequences. At the cutting edge, tools are evaluated positively insofar as there is reason to believe that using them will have good consequences. Lastly, tools can be generally good, insofar as their use encourages the development of epistemic virtues, which are good because they have good epistemic consequences.
引用
收藏
相关论文
共 91 条
  • [41] Jacob F(2003)On the limitations of thought experiments in physics and the consequences for physics education Science and Education 80 931-32
  • [42] Kind A(2000)Epistemological resources for thought experimentation in science learning International Journal of Science Education 52 431-730
  • [43] Knuuttila T(2020)Learning through the scientific imagination [Special Issue] Argumenta Journal of Analytic Philosophy 60 876-107
  • [44] Knuuttila T(2002)Review of graph comprehension research: Implications for instruction Educational Psychology Review 58 24-275
  • [45] Kösem ŞD(2013)Why do biologists use so many diagrams? Philosophy of Science XVII 9-114
  • [46] Özdemir ÖF(2021)Why computer simulation cannot be an end of thought experimentation Journal for General Philosophy of Science 28 711-57
  • [47] Kozma R(1992)Maxwell’s Demon, rectifiers, and the second law: Computer simulation of Smoluchowski’s trapdoor American Journal of Physics 29 87-82
  • [48] Krenn M(2016)Taming theory with thought experiments: Understanding and scientific progress Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 34 250-undefined
  • [49] Erhard M(2017)Imagination: A Sine Qua non of science Croatian Journal of Philosophy 50 91-undefined
  • [50] Zeilinger A(2019)Towards a dual process epistemology of imagination Synthese 1 39-undefined