How to be rational about empirical success in ongoing science: The case of the quantum nose and its critics

Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 69:40-51 (2018)
  Copy   BIBTEX


Empirical success is a central criterion for scientific decision-making. Yet its understanding in philosophical studies of science deserves renewed attention: Should philosophers think differently about the advancement of science when they deal with the uncertainty of outcome in ongoing research in comparison with historical episodes? This paper argues that normative appeals to empirical success in the evaluation of competing scientific explanations can result in unreliable conclusions, especially when we are looking at the changeability of direction in ongoing investigations. The challenges we encounter arise from the inherent dynamics of disciplinary and experimental objectives in research practice. In this paper we discuss how these dynamics inform the evaluation of empirical success by analyzing three of its requirements: data accommodation, instrumental reliability, and predictive power. We conclude that the assessment of empirical success in developing inquiry is set against the background of a model’s interactive success and prospective value in an experimental context. Our argument is exemplified by the analysis of an apparent controversy surrounding the model of a quantum nose in research on olfaction. Notably the public narrative of this controversy rests on a distorted perspective on measures of empirical success.



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,088

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

Are the Laws of Quantum Logic Laws of Nature?Peter Mittelstaedt - 2012 - Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 43 (2):215-222.
The Construction of Quantum Reality.Stig Stenholm - 2012 - Foundations of Physics 42 (1):86-97.
Is quantum probability rational?Alasdair I. Houston & Karoline Wiesner - 2013 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 36 (3):291 - 292.
Historical magic in old quantum theory?Peter Vickers - 2012 - European Journal for Philosophy of Science 2 (1):1-19.
Laudan's Model of Axiological Change and the Bohr-Einstein Debate.Henry J. Folse - 1990 - PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1990:77 - 88.
Rational choice, empirical contributions, and the scientific enterprise.Morris P. Fiorina - 1995 - Critical Review: A Journal of Politics and Society 9 (1-2):85-94.
A Philosopher’s Guide to Empirical Success.Malcolm R. Forster - 2007 - Philosophy of Science 74 (5):588-600.


Added to PP

35 (#408,502)

6 months
5 (#311,051)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Ann-Sophie Barwich
Indiana University, Bloomington

Citations of this work

Monist and Pluralist Approaches on Underdetermination: A Case Study in Evolutionary Microbiology.Thomas Bonnin - 2020 - Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 52 (1):135-155.

Add more citations