Thought Experiments in Science and in Science Education

In Michael R. Matthews (ed.), International Handbook of Research in History, Philosophy and Science Teaching. Springer. pp. 1235-1256 (2014)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This chapter will discuss the role of thought experiments in science and in science teaching. The constructive and destructive roles played by thought experiments in the construction of scientific theories can be used in science teaching to help students to understand the processes of science. In addition, they have potential to be used as a teaching tool for developing students’ conceptual understanding. The use of thought experiments can also increase students’ interest in science and help them in understanding situations beyond their everyday experiences. It has been reported elsewhere that the use of thought experiments in science teaching may be challenging for both teachers and students. Despite the recent increase in research activities with respect to thought experiments in science education, further systematic research work is still needed for the most effective methods to be discovered of how best to use thought experiments in science teaching. Of particular importance will be studies that focus on science teachers’ understanding of thought experiments and their actual use in a classroom environment.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,122

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Thought experiments and conceptual revision.Ian Winchester - 1990 - Studies in Philosophy and Education 10 (1):73-80.
When are thought experiments poor ones?Jeanne Peijnenburg & David Atkinson - 2003 - Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 34 (2):305-322.
Rethinking thought experiments.Alisa Bokulich - 2001 - Perspectives on Science 9 (3):285-307.
On thought experiments: Is there more to the argument?John D. Norton - 2004 - Philosophy of Science 71 (5):1139-1151.
The logic of thought experiments.Martin Bunzl - 1996 - Synthese 106 (2):227 - 240.
Poems of Productive Imagination: Thought Experiments, Christianity and Science in Novalis.Yiftach Fehige - 2013 - Neue Zeitschrift für Systematicsche Theologie Und Religionsphilosophie 55 (1):54-83.
Thought experiments.Roy A. Sorensen - 1992 - New York: Oxford University Press.
Poor Thought Experiments? A Comment on Peijnenburg and Atkinson.Daniel Cohnitz - 2006 - Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 37 (2):373 - 392.
Thought Experiments Considered Harmful.Paul Thagard - 2014 - Perspectives on Science 22 (2):122-139.

Analytics

Added to PP
2014-12-11

Downloads
33 (#447,419)

6 months
6 (#349,140)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Thought Experiments.Roy A. Sorensen - 1992 - Oxford and New York: Oup Usa.
Are Thought Experiments Just What You Thought?John D. Norton - 1996 - Canadian Journal of Philosophy 26 (3):333 - 366.
How do Scientists Think? Capturing the Dynamics of Conceptual Change in Science.Nancy Nersessian - 1992 - In R. Giere & H. Feigl (eds.), Cognitive Models of Science. University of Minnesota Press. pp. 3--45.
Galileo and the indispensability of scientific thought experiment.Tamar Szabó Gendler - 1998 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 49 (3):397-424.

View all 30 references / Add more references