Importance in scientific discovery

Abstract

While everyone acknowledges that the distinction between important and unimportant work is crucial in and for science, there is effectively no systematic investigation of how this distinction is to be conceived and implemented. This paper takes some tentative steps into remedying this deficiency.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,628

External links

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

Through your library

  • Only published works are available at libraries.

Similar books and articles

Error as means to discovery.Kevin Elliott - 2004 - Philosophy of Science 71 (2):174-197.
The process of discovery.Andrew Lugg - 1985 - Philosophy of Science 52 (2):207-220.
Herbert Simon's Computational Models of Scientific Discovery.Stephen Downes - 1990 - PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1990:97-108.
Horizon for Scientific Practice: Scientific Discovery and Progress.James A. Marcum - 2010 - International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 24 (2):187-215.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
19 (#794,881)

6 months
2 (#1,185,463)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Nicholas Rescher
University of Pittsburgh

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references