Epistemologia. An Italian Journal for the Philosophy of Science 33:05-26 (2010)
Authors | |
Abstract |
The operational perspective here defended permits a reflexive-transcendental point of view that sharply distinguishes the two concepts, while, at the same time, maintaining the connection between them. On the one hand, simply imagining that the experimental apparatus, counterfactually anticipated in a thought experiment, has really been constructed is sufficient to erase any difference between thought and real experiments. On the other hand, this very ‘imagining’, this capacity of the mind to assume every real entity as a possible entity, underpins the difference in principle – a properly transcendental difference – between thought and real experiments. This difference, however, implies the intimate association between experiment and thought experiment: All thought experiments must be thought of as translatable into real ones, and all real experiments as realisations of thought ones. What thought experiments have over and above real experiments is the mere fact that they exist in a purely hypothetical sphere; what real have over and above thought experiments is the mere fact that they overstep the sphere of the possible, in the experiment’s real execution.
|
Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) |
Categories | (categorize this paper) |
Reprint years | 2009, 2010 |
Options |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Download options
References found in this work BETA
Representing and Intervening: Introductory Topics in the Philosophy of Natural Science.Ian Hacking - 1983 - Cambridge University Press.
Galilean Idealization.Ernan McMullin - 1985 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 16 (3):247.
The Laboratory of the Mind: Thought Experiments in the Natural Sciences.James Robert Brown - 1991 - Routledge.
Representing and Intervening: Introductory Topics in the Philosophy of Natural Science.Davis Baird - 1988 - Noûs 22 (2):299-307.
View all 35 references / Add more references
Citations of this work BETA
What Notion of Possibility Should We Use in Assessing Scientific Thought Experiments?Rawad El Skaf - 2017 - Lato Sensu, Revue de la Société de Philosophie des Sciences 4 (1).
Similar books and articles
Experiments and Thought Experiments in Natural Science.David Atkinson - 2001 - Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science 232:209-226.
Intuition Pumps and the Proper Use of Thought Experiments.Elke Brendel - 2004 - Dialectica 58 (1):89–108.
What is Experimental about Thought Experiments?David C. Gooding - 1992 - PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1992:280 - 290.
Why Thought Experiments Do Not Transcend Empiricism.John D. Norton - 2002 - In Christopher Hitchcock (ed.), Contemporary Debates in the Philosophy of Science. Blackwell. pp. 44-66.
Thought Experiments and Mental Simulations.John Zeimbekis - 2011 - In Katerina Ierodiakonou & Sophie Roux (eds.), Thought Experiments in Methodological and Historical Contexts. Brill.
Why Thought Experiments Are Not Arguments.Michael A. Bishop - 1999 - Philosophy of Science 66 (4):534-541.
Analytics
Added to PP index
2009-06-12
Total views
171 ( #68,583 of 2,506,297 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
9 ( #81,281 of 2,506,297 )
2009-06-12
Total views
171 ( #68,583 of 2,506,297 )
Recent downloads (6 months)
9 ( #81,281 of 2,506,297 )
How can I increase my downloads?
Downloads