25 found
Order:
Disambiguations
Jamie Shaw [24]Jamie Craig Owen Shaw [1]
See also
Jamie Shaw
University of Toronto, St. George Campus
  1.  57
    On the very idea of pursuitworthiness.Jamie Shaw - 2022 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 91 (C):103-112.
    Recent philosophical literature has turned its attention towards assessments of how to judge scientific proposals as worthy of further inquiry. Previous work, as well as papers contained within this special issue, propose criteria for pursuitworthiness (Achinstein, 1993; Whitt, 1992; DiMarco & Khalifa, 2019; Laudan, 1977; Shan, 2020; Šešelja et al., 2012). The purpose of this paper is to assess the grounds on which pursuitworthiness demands can be legitimately made. To do this, I propose a challenge to the possibility of even (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   13 citations  
  2.  82
    Was Feyerabend an anarchist? The structure(s) of ‘anything goes’.Jamie Shaw - 2017 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 64:11-21.
  3.  36
    Feyerabend and manufactured disagreement: reflections on expertise, consensus, and science policy.Jamie Shaw - 2020 - Synthese 198 (Suppl 25):6053-6084.
    Feyerabend is infamous for his defense of pluralism, which he extends to every topic he discusses. Disagreement, a by-product of this pluralism, becomes a sign of flourishing critical communities. In Feyerabend’s political works, he extends this pluralism from science to democratic societies and incorporates his earlier work on scientific methodology into a procedure for designing just policy. However, a description and analysis of Feyerabend’s conception of disagreement is lacking. In this paper, I reconstruct and assess Feyerabend’s conception of disagreement, with (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  4.  30
    Feyerabend’s well-ordered science: how an anarchist distributes funds.Jamie Shaw - 2018 - Synthese 198 (1):419-449.
    To anyone vaguely aware of Feyerabend, the title of this paper would appear as an oxymoron. For Feyerabend, it is often thought, science is an anarchic practice with no discernible structure. Against this trend, I elaborate the groundwork that Feyerabend has provided for the beginnings of an approach to organizing scientific research. Specifically, I argue that Feyerabend’s pluralism, once suitably modified, provides a plausible account of how to organize science. These modifications come from C.S. Peirce’s account of the economics of (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   12 citations  
  5.  28
    Why the Realism Debate Matters for Science Policy: The Case of the Human Brain Project.Jamie Craig Owen Shaw - 2018 - Spontaneous Generations 9 (1):82-98.
    There has been a great deal of skepticism towards the value of the realism/anti-realism debate. More specifically, many have argued that plausible formulations of realism and anti-realism do not differ substantially in any way. In this paper, I argue against this trend by demonstrating how a hypothetical resolution of the debate, through deeper engagement with the historical record, has important implications for our criterion of theory pursuit and science policy. I do this by revisiting Arthur Fine’s ‘small handful’ argument for (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   9 citations  
  6.  41
    Feyerabend, funding, and the freedom of science: the case of traditional Chinese medicine.Jamie Shaw - 2021 - European Journal for Philosophy of Science 11 (2):1-27.
    From the 1970s onwards, Feyerabend argues against the freedom of science. This will seem strange to some, as his epistemological anarchism is often taken to suggest that scientists should be free of even the most basic and obvious norms of science. His argument against the freedom of science is heavily influenced by his case study of the interference of Chinese communists in mainland China during the 1950s wherein the government forced local universities to continue researching traditional Chinese medicine rather than (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  7.  21
    How Can a Taxonomy of Stances Help Clarify Classical Debates on Scientific Change?Hakob Barseghyan & Jamie Shaw - 2017 - Philosophies 2 (4):24.
    In this paper, we demonstrate how a systematic taxonomy of stances can help elucidate two classic debates of the historical turn—the Lakatos–Feyerabend debate concerning theory rejection and the Feyerabend–Kuhn debate about pluralism during normal science. We contend that Kuhn, Feyerabend, and Lakatos were often talking at cross-purposes due to the lack of an agreed upon taxonomy of stances. Specifically, we provide three distinct stances that scientists take towards theories: acceptance of a theory as the best available description of its domain, (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   7 citations  
  8.  17
    Revisiting the Basic/Applied Science Distinction: The Significance of Urgent Science for Science Funding Policy.Jamie Shaw - 2022 - Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 53 (4):477-499.
    There has been a resurgence between two closely related discussions concerning modern science funding policy. The first revolves around the coherence and usefulness of the distinction between basic and applied science and the second concerns whether science should be free to pursue research according to its own internal standards or pursue socially responsible research agendas that are held accountable to moral or political standards. In this paper, I argue that the distinction between basic and applied science, and the concomitant debate (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  9.  59
    The revolt against rationalism: Feyerabend's critical philosophy.Jamie Shaw - 2020 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 80:110-122.
  10.  30
    Duhem on Good Sense and Theory Pursuit: From Virtue to Social Epistemology.Jamie Shaw - 2020 - International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 33 (2):67-85.
    ABSTRACT The emerging consensus in the secondary literature on Duhem is that his notion of ‘good sense’ is a virtue of individual scientists that guides them choosie between empirically equal rival theories : 149–159; Ivanova 2010. “Pierre Duhem’s Good Sense as a Guide to Theory Choice.” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 41 : 58–64; Fairweather 2011. “The Epistemic Value of Good Sense.” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 43 : 139–146; Bhakthavatsalam. “Duhemian Good (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  11.  16
    Interpreting Feyerabend: Critical Essays.Karim Bschir & Jamie Shaw (eds.) - 2021 - New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
    This collection of new essays interprets and critically evaluates the philosophy of Paul Feyerabend. It offers innovative historical scholarship on Feyerabend's take on topics such as realism, empiricism, mimesis, voluntarism, pluralism, materialism, and the mind-body problem, as well as certain debates in the philosophy of physics. It also considers the ways in which Feyerabend's thought can contribute to contemporary debates in science and public policy, including questions about the nature of scientific methodology, the role of science in society, citizen science, (...)
    No categories
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  12.  63
    Knowledge transfer in theoretical ecology: Implications for incommensurability, voluntarism, and pluralism.Justin Donhauser & Jamie Shaw - 2019 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 77:11-20.
    Well-known epistemologies of science have implications for how best to understand knowledge transfer (KT). Yet, to date, no serious attempt has been made explicate these particular implications. This paper infers views about KT from two popular epistemologies; what we characterize as incommensurabilitist views (after Devitt 2001; Bird 2002, 2008; Sankey and Hoyningen-Huene 2013) and voluntarist views (after van Fraassen 1984; Dupré 2001; Chakravartty 2015). We argue views of the former sort define the methodological, ontological, and social conditions under which research (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  13.  13
    Feyerabend and the Philosophy of Physics.Jamie Shaw & Michael T. Stuart - 2022 - International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 35 (1):1-4.
    In a reference letter for Feyerabend’s application to UC Berkeley, Carl Hempel writes that ‘Mr. Feyerabend combines a forceful and penetrating analytic mind with a remarkably thorough training and...
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  14.  30
    Pluralism, Pragmatism and Functional Explanations.Jamie Shaw - 2016 - Kairos 15 (1):1-18.
    While many philosophers speak of ‘pluralism’ within philosophy of biology, there has been little said about what such pluralism amounts to or what its underlying assumptions are. This has provoked so me anxiety about whether pluralism is compatible with their commitment to naturalism. This paper surveys three prominent pluralist positions ‘integrative pluralism’, and both Peter Godfrey-Smith’s and Beth Preston’s pluralist analyses of functional explanations in evolutionary biology) and demonstrates how all three are committed to a form of pragmatism. This analysis (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  15.  11
    Peer Review, Innovation, and Predicting the Future of Science: The Scope of Lotteries in Science Funding Policy.Jamie Shaw - forthcoming - Philosophy of Science:1-15.
    Recent science funding policy scholars and practitioners have advocated for the use of lotteries, or elements of random chance, as supplementations of traditional peer review for evaluating grant applications. One of the primary motivations for lotteries is their purported openness to innovative research. The purpose of this paper is to argue that current proponents of funding science by lottery overestimate the viability of peer review and thus unduly restrict the scope of lotteries in science funding practice. I further show how (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  16.  54
    The Problem of the Empirical Basis in the Popperian Tradition: Popper, Bartley, and Feyerabend.Jamie Shaw - 2020 - Hopos: The Journal of the International Society for the History of Philosophy of Science 10 (2):524-561.
    The problem of the empirical basis is one of the most prominent difficulties within the Popperian tradition. Some claim that Popper’s anti-inductivism and antipsychologism lead to the concession that science has no empirical basis. Recent commentators have focused on this problem in Popper’s methodology. However, the problem also arises in a peculiar way in the thought of two underdiscussed members of the Popperian tradition: William Bartley and Paul Feyerabend. In this article, I aim to accomplish three primary goals. First, I (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  17. Evaluating and explaining the success of science: A historical perspective.Jamie Shaw - unknown
    The recent literature surrounding the realist/anti-realist debates in the philosophy of science has focused its attention towards the role that history plays in explaining why science is successful and thus approximately true. This has been caused, in large part, by the Pessimistic Meta-Induction (PMI), which has challenged attempted explanations by turning our attention towards the large amount of scientific theories that have been abandoned but were still empirically successful. There will be two primary goals of this paper. The first will (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  18. What Theoretical Ecology Reveals about Knowledge Transfer.Justin Donhauser & Jamie Shaw - forthcoming - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A:1-20.
    Well-known epistemologies of science have implications for how best to understand knowledge transfer (KT). Yet, to date, no serious attempt has been made to explicate these particular implications. This paper infers views about KT from two popular epistemologies; what we characterize as incommensurabilitist views (after Devitt, 2001; Bird, 2002, 2008; Sankey and Hoyningen-Huene 2013) and voluntarist views (after Van Fraassen, 1984; Dupré, 2001; Chakravartty, 2015). We argue views of the former sort define the methodological, ontological, and social conditions under which (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  19. Scientonomy: The Challenges of Constructing a Theory of Scientific Change.Hakob Barseghyan, Jamie Shaw, Paul Edward Patton & Gregory Rupik (eds.) - 2022 - Wilmington: Vernon Press.
    During the so-called 'historical turn' in the philosophy of science, philosophers and historians boldly argued for general patterns throughout the history of science. From Kuhn's landmark "Structure of Scientific Revolutions" until the "Scrutinizing Science" project led by Larry Laudan, there was optimism that there could be a general theoretical approach to understanding the process of scientific change. This optimism gradually faded as historians and philosophers began to focus on the details of specific case studies located within idiosyncratic historical, cultural, and (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  20.  15
    A Pluralism Worth Having: Feyerabend's Well-Ordered Science.Jamie Shaw - 2018 - Dissertation, University of Western Ontario
    The goal of this dissertation is to reconstruct, critically evaluate, and apply the pluralism of Paul Feyerabend. I conclude by suggesting future points of contact between Feyerabend’s pluralism and topics of interest in contemporary philosophy of science. I begin, in Chapter 1, by reconstructing Feyerabend’s critical philosophy. I show how his published works from 1948 until 1970 show a remarkably consistent argumentative strategy which becomes more refined and general as Feyerabend’s thought matures. Specifically, I argue that Feyerabend develops a persuasive (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  21.  9
    A rich resource on scientific knowledge: Kevin McCain and Kostas Kampourakis: What is scientific knowledge? An introduction to contemporary epistemology of science. New York: Routledge, 2019, 328 pp, £ 120 HB.Jamie Shaw - 2020 - Metascience 29 (2):187-191.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  22. Feyerabend never was an eliminative materialist : Feyerabend's meta-philosophy and the mind-body problem.Jamie Shaw - 2021 - In Karim Bschir & Jamie Shaw (eds.), Interpreting Feyerabend: Critical Essays. Cambridge University Press.
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  23. Introduction: Paul Feyerabend's philosophy in the 21st century.Jamie Shaw & Karim Bschir - 2021 - In Karim Bschir & Jamie Shaw (eds.), Interpreting Feyerabend: Critical Essays. Cambridge University Press.
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  24.  27
    The Realistic Empiricism of Mach, James, and Russell: Neutral Monism Reconceived ERIC C. BANKS Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014; 217pp.; $95.00. [REVIEW]Jamie Shaw - 2018 - Dialogue 57 (3):648-650.
  25.  11
    Quantum Ontology: A Guide to the Metaphysics of Quantum Mechanics PETER J. LEWIS Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016; 207 pp.; $35.00. [REVIEW]Jamie Shaw - 2017 - Dialogue 56 (1):185-187.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark