This paper deals with calibration in scientific practices which investigate relatively well-understood natural phenomena by means of already standardized instrumental devices. Calibration is a crucial topic, since it conditions the reliability of instrumental procedures in science. Yet although important, calibration is a relatively neglected topic. We think more attention should be devoted to calibration. The paper attempts to take a step in this direction. The aims are two-fold: (1) to characterize calibration in a relatively simple kind of scientific practices; (2) (...) to provide conceptual and taxonomic tools of broader scope that help to get a better understanding of calibration in more complex cases and other kinds of scientific practices. For this purpose, we first provide indications for why a conceptual framework is needed. Second, a bibliographic survey of works dealing with calibration is attempted. Third, we introduce different tools to enable a better understanding of calibration. Fourth, we turn to the elaboration of what we call a “simple exemplar” of calibration, illustrated through the case of the calibration of an equal-arm balance. Fifth, the tools previously introduced, and the framework of the simple exemplar, are applied to a more complex case of calibration: calibration procedures in X-ray experiments. This serves to show the work accomplished by the simple exemplar and to emphasize features of more complex cases of calibration. Eventually, we revisit and specify the nature, status, scope and value of the proposed framework. (shrink)

Le projet à l’origine de ce dossier thématique est celui d’une étude comparative de l’expérimentation telle qu’elle apparaît dans les sciences de la nature et dans les sciences humaines et sociales. Il illustre et prolonge les réflexions d’un séminaire de recherche sur le même sujet, organisé par Catherine Allamel-Raffin, qui s’est tenu pendant deux ans (2017-2018) à l’université de Strasbourg grâce à un financement de la Misha (Maison Interuniversitaire des Sciences de l’Homme – Alsace). Les...

Introduction Le philosophe des sciences et le sociologue antidifférenciationniste À partir de quels matériaux de base le philosophe étudie-t-il les démarches et évalue-t-il la portée épistémique des résultats obtenus dans les sciences de la nature? Thomas S. Kuhn a ironisé sur ce point en suggérant que la distinction entre contexte de découverte et contexte de justification notamment ne donnait pas lieu à des analyses plausibles, dès lors que les philosophes se contentent de trouver leurs so...

This book takes a novel approach by highlighting comparative and long-term historical perspectives on experimental practice. The juxtaposition of accounts of natural, social, and medical experimentation is very enlightening, especially because the authors put the emphasis on the different kinds of objects of experimentation (physical matter, chemical reagents, social groups, organizations, sick individuals, archeological remains) and demonstrate how much the kinds of objects matter for the practice of experimentation, its methods, tools, and methodologies. Taken together, the chapters raise several fascinating (...) questions for further study: What do these different approaches have in common? Why do we call them “experimentation”? What are the intersections among the fields and their developments? The volume engages philosophical approaches that are not well known to Anglophone readers (Bachelard, Bergson, Bernard, Canguilhem, among others) and brings to attention a wealth of Francophone secondary literature on past and present scientific experimentation. The collection fills a yawning gap in science, science studies, and philosophy of science teaching, making it particularly valuable philosophers and historians of science in all subfields. (shrink)

This introduction aims at raising the central questions that will be discussed throughout the book in a variety of ways, adapted to each scientific discipline. What is experimentation, and what distinguishes it from observation in different disciplines? What epistemic status should experimentation have in relation to theory? In which institutional framework do experimental practices find their place? To answer these questions, we first detail the various functions of experimentation, abandoning the idea that it can be reduced to the sole function (...) of validating certain theoretical statements – those that correspond to the researchers’ hypotheses. The key word here is diversity, which is evident on several levels: that of the nature of the objects studied, that of the instrumentation and that of the aims pursued in the different sciences, whether natural sciences or human and social sciences. (shrink)