Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-l4dxg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-07T16:42:57.882Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Phenomenotechnique in Historical Perspective: Its Origins and Implications for Philosophy of Science

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2022

Teresa Castelão-Lawless
Teresa Castelão-Lawless*
Affiliation:
Philosophy Department Grand Valley State University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article provides an overview of the historical and philosophical context from which originated G. Bachelard's concept of “phenomenotechnique”. It analyzes why phenomenotechnique is crucial for science studies. By incorporating the concept of phenomenotechnique into Hacking's and Galison's models of science, I argue that we can avoid the radicalism of both while also preventing the analysis of scientific practices from collapsing into the interpretive frames mandated by social constructivists.

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 62 , Issue 1 , March 1995 , pp. 44 - 59
Copyright
Copyright © Philosophy of Science Association 1995

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

†

Send reprint requests to the author, Philosophy Department, Grand Valley State University, 1 Campus Drive, Allendale, MI 49401-9403, USA.

References

Ackermann, R. (1985), Data, Instruments and Theory: A Dialectical Approach to Understanding Science. Princeton: Princeton University Press.10.1515/9781400854936CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bachelard, G. (1951), L'Activité Rationaliste de la Physique Contemporaine. Paris: Presses Universitaires de France.Google Scholar
Bachelard, G. (1970), études. Paris: J. Vrin.Google Scholar
Bachelard, G. ([1934] 1978), Le Nouvel esprit scientifique. Paris: Alcan.Google Scholar
Bachelard, G. ([1938] 1986), La Formation de l'esprit scientifique: contribution dune psychanalyse de la connaissance objective. Paris: J. Vrin.Google Scholar
Benda, J. (1950), De Quelques constantes de l'esprit humain: critique du mobilisme contemporaine (Bergson, Brunschvicg, Boutroux, Le Roy, Bachelard, Rougier). Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
Bergson, H. (1965), Duration and Simultaneity: With Reference to Einstein's Theory. Translated by L. Jacobson. New York: Anchor Books.Google Scholar
Bernstein, J. (1973), Einstein. New York: The Viking Press.Google Scholar
Biezunski, M. (1982), “Einstein à Paris”, in Thuillier, et al. (eds.), Thuillier et al. Paris: ed. du Seuil, pp. 267–293.Google Scholar
Bohr, N. (1949), “Discussion with Einstein on Epistemological Problems in Atomic Physics”, in Schilpp, P. A., (ed.), P. A. Schilpp, 1st ed. Evanston, IL: The Library of Living Philosophers, pp. 201–241.Google Scholar
Bohr, N. ([1960] 1963), “The Unity of Human Knowledge”, in Essays 1958–1962 on Atomic Physics and Human Knowledge. New York: Interscience Publishers, pp. 8–16.Google Scholar
Davies, P. C. W. and Brown, J. R. (1986), The Ghost in the Atom: A Discussion of the Mysteries of Quantum Physics. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Duhem, P. (1915), La Science Allemande. Paris: Hermann & Fils.Google Scholar
Duhem, P. ([1906] 1954), The Aim and Structure of Physical Theory. Reprint. Translated by Wiener, P. P. Originally published as La Théorie Physique, son object, et sa structure (Paris: Marcel Rivière & Cie). Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Galison, P. (1987), How Experiments End. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Hacking, I. (1983), Representing and Intervening: Introductory Topics in the Philosophy of Natural Science. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511814563CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heisenberg, W. (1958), Physics and Philosophy: The Revolution in Modern Science. 1st ed. New York: Harper & Brothers Publishers.Google Scholar
Hempel, C. (1965), Aspects of Scientific Explanation and Other Essays in Philosophy of Science. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
Husserl, E. (1964), The Idea of Phenomenology. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.Google Scholar
Idhe, D. (1991), Instrumental Realism: The Interface between Philosophy of Science and Philosophy of Technology. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Jungnickel, C. and McCormmach, R. (1986), Intellectual Mastery of Nature: Theoretical Physics from Ohm to Einstein, vol. 2. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Kojève, A. (1990), L'Idée du déterminisme dans la physique classique et dans la physique moderne. Paris: Le Livre de Poche.Google Scholar
Kuhn, T. (1970), The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Latour, B. and Woolgar, S. (1979), Laboratory Life: The Social Construction of Scientific Facts. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Mason, S. (1962), Main Currents of Scientific Thoughts: A History of Sciences. New York: Collier Books.Google Scholar
Meyerson, é. ([1908] 1930), Identity and Reality. London: Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
Miller, A. I. (1986), Frontiers of Physics: 1900–1911. Boston: Birkhauser.Google Scholar
Pais, A. (1982), ‘Subtle is the Lord …‘: The Science and the Life of Albert Einstein. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Planck, M. (1960), A Survey of Physical Theory. Translated by R. Jones and D. H. Williams. New York: Dover.Google Scholar
Popper, K. (1992), The Logic of Scientific Discovery. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Toth, I. (1983), “La Revolution non-Euclidienne”, in Thuillier, et al., (eds.), Thuillier et al., Paris: ed. du Seuil, pp. 241–264.Google Scholar
van Fraassen, B. (1980), The Scientific Image. Oxford: Clarendon Press.10.1093/0198244274.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar