This paper has a twofold purpose. First, it aims at highlighting one difference in how counterfactuals work in general history, on the one hand, and in history of the natural sciences, on the other hand. As we show, both in general history and in history of science good counterfactual narratives need to be plausible, where plausibility is construed as appropriate continuity of both the antecedent and the consequent of the counterfactual with what we know about the world. However, in general (...) history it is often possible to imagine a consequent dramatically different from the actual historical development, and yet plausible; in history of science, due to plausibility concerns, imagining a consequent far removed from the results of actual science seems more complicated. The second aim of the paper is to assess whether and to what degree counterfactual histories of science can advance the cause of the so-called “contingency thesis,” namely, the claim that history of science might have followed a path leading to alternative, non-equivalent theories, as successful as the ones that we currently embrace. We distinguish various versions of the contingency thesis and argue that counterfactual histories of science support weak versions of the thesis. (shrink)

Após apresentar, em linhas gerais, a abordagem dos modelos causais em história da ciência, define-se a noção de “avanço” como uma manifestação cultural de natureza cognitiva ou, na linguagem da biologia evolutiva, como um “meme” cognitivo. Discute-se até que ponto tais avanços podem ser considerados verdadeiras “unidades”, e discorre-se sobre a noção problemática de “unidades que se conservariam na passagem de uma história possível para outra”. Comentários são feitos sobre a distinção entre a definição de um avanço e seu grau (...) de aceitação e, por fim, sobre a plausibilidade de considerar que (em primeira aproximação) o significado de um avanço não se modifica com a evolução da ciência. No apêndice, descreve-se a classificação de avanços em sessenta tipos, distribuídos em dez classes. Palavras-chave: Mudança científica, história da ciência, modelos causais, unidade de conhecimento, avanço, meme. (shrink)

The concept of natural kind is center stage in the debates about scientific realism. Champions of scientific realism such as Richard Boyd hold that our most developed scientific theories allow us to “cut the world at its joints” (Boyd, 1981, 1984, 1991). In the long run we can disclose natural kinds as nature made them, though as science progresses improvements in theory allow us to revise the extension of natural kind terms.