Bureaucrats, Comment administrators, editor, Interface administrators, Administrators (Semantic MediaWiki), Curators (Semantic MediaWiki), Suppressors, Administrators, Widget editors
11,019
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Most noteworthy is [[Larry LaudanThomas Kuhn]]’s account of changes can be credited by articulating this idea first in drug trial methods. In his [[Laudan Kuhn (19841962)|''Science and Values''Structure]], Laudan argued that the discovery of previously unaccounted effects (such as placebo effect or experimenter's bias) resulted in the formulation part of new methods his conception of drug testingparadigm shifts.[[CiteRef::Laudan Kuhn (19841962)|pp. 38-39]]
The same [[Dudley Shapere]] great developed the idea has been expressed around the same time by Ernan McMullin. In of beliefs affecting methods of theory evaluation in his account [[Shapere (1980)|The Character of the transition from the Aristotelian Medieval method to the hypothetico-deductive method in the early 18th centuryScientific Change]], McMullin shows where he argued that the employment criteria scientists employ in theory assessment are not transcendent to science but are an integral part of the hypothetico-deductivism was a result of accepting that the world is more complex than it appears in our observations.[[CiteRef::McMullin Shapere (19881980)|pp. 32-34]]
Mechanism of Method Employment (view source)
Revision as of 04:07, 13 February 2017
, 04:07, 13 February 2017no edit summary
|Prehistory=A number of philosophers of science addressed the question of method employment. [[Thomas Kuhn]], [[Paul Feyerabend]], [[Dudley Shapere]], [[Larry Laudan]], and [[Ernan McMullin]] all suggested that our beliefs about the world shape our methods of theory evaluation.
Similarly, in his [[Laudan (1984)|''Science and Values'']], [[Larry Laudan]] argued that the discovery of previously unaccounted effects (such as placebo effect or experimenter's bias) resulted in the formulation of new methods of drug testing.[[CiteRef::Laudan (1984)|pp. 38-39]] The same idea has been expressed around the same time by [[Ernan McMullin]]. In his account of the transition from the Aristotelian Medieval method to the hypothetico-deductive method in the early 18th century, McMullin shows that the employment of the hypothetico-deductivism was a result of accepting that the world is more complex than it appears in our observations.[[CiteRef::McMullin (1988)|pp. 32-34]] There have been many other attempts at explaining how methods of theory evaluation come to be employed by a community. Consider, for instance the reconstructions of Plato’s method performed by David Lindberg,[[CiteRef::Lindberg (2007)|pp. 37-38]] or the proposal of synchronous change in paradigm shifts by Thomas Kuhn.[[CiteRef::Kuhn (1962)]],
[[Barry Barnes]], [[David Bloor]], [[Bruno Latour]], [[Steve Woolgar]] and other have suggested that methods of science are determined to a large degree by the underlying sociocultural factors.[[CiteRef::Latour and Woolgar (1979)]][[CiteRef::Barnes, Bloor, and Henry (1996)]]
