Experiments without Concrete

Epistemology and Philosophy of Science 49 (3):124-139 (2016)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The article examines the question whether the economic discipline can be regarded as a kind of natural science it strives to be, taking into consideration the interpretation of an economic model as a kind of a thought experiment and closer connection between thought experiment and experimentation. The authors turn to epistemological analysis of thought experiments both in natural sciences and in economics and consider the historical background of this research tool and its relations with the experimentation practice. The study shows that the use of thought experiments in the economic theory and in natural sciences are fundamentally different. In natural science the thought experiment has never been detached from the material experimentation. On contrary, in economics it is used as an isolated procedure. However, isolated thought experiment is not a full-fledged research tool for studying the reality, as in that case it will affect some troubles with realism and practical efficiency of the research results. Rather, it constitutes the instrument for structuring or «mapping» the field of inquiry and can give results with social-constructive capacities.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,386

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 Experiment more geometric.Daria Drozdova - 2016 - Epistemology and Philosophy of Science 49 (3):43-47.
Tracing the Development of Thought Experiments in the Philosophy of Natural Sciences.Aspasia S. Moue, Kyriakos A. Masavetas & Haido Karayianni - 2006 - Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 37 (1):61-75.
Experiments and thought experiments in natural science.David Atkinson - 2001 - Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science 232:209-226.
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.
Why Thought Experiments are Not Arguments.Michael A. Bishop - 1999 - Philosophy of Science 66 (4):534-541.
Backdoor analycity.Gerald J. Massey - 1991 - In Tamara Horowitz & Gerald J. Massey (eds.), Thought Experiments in Science and Philosophy. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
Thought Experiments in Science and Philosophy.Tamara Horowitz & Gerald J. Massey (eds.) - 1991 - Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
Thought experiments.Roy A. Sorensen - 1992 - New York: Oxford University Press.
The evidential significance of thought experiment in science.W. J. - 1996 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 27 (2):233-250.
Discovering Patterns.Andrei Paramonov - 2016 - Epistemology and Philosophy of Science 49 (3):36-42.
Zum Verhältnis zwischen Experiment und Gedankenexperiment in den Naturwissenschaften.Marco Buzzoni - 2007 - Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 38 (2):219-237.

Analytics

Added to PP
2017-02-15

Downloads
9 (#1,228,347)

6 months
5 (#638,139)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Taras Aleksandrovich Varkhotov
Moscow State University

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references