Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T15:38:26.107Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Understanding, Values, and the Aims of Science

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2022

Henk W. de Regt
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The understanding that comes with scientific explanation is regarded as one of the central epistemic aims of science. In earlier work I have argued that scientists achieve understanding of phenomena by basing their explanations on intelligible theories, where intelligibility is a contextually determined value. In this article, I address the question of how the aim of understanding relates to other epistemic aims of science, such as prediction of empirical evidence and accurate description of phenomena. Moreover, I examine the associated values and analyze their role and interaction through a historical case study.

Type
Understanding and Imagination
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 87 , Issue 5: PSA 2018 - Proceedings of the 2018 biennial meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association. Part II Symposia Papers , December 2020 , pp. 921 - 932
Copyright
Copyright © The Philosophy of Science Association

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

†

I would like to thank my cosymposiasts, Angela Potochnik, Kate Elgin, and Kareem Khalifa, and the audiences at PSA 2018 (Seattle, November 2018) and the inaugural SURe workshop (Bordeaux, February 2019), for helpful discussions. This article was completed during a research stay at the Centre for Logic and Philosophy of Science, Ghent University. I thank Erik Weber and the scientific research network Logical and Methodological Analysis of Scientific Reasoning Processes sponsored by the Research Foundation Flanders for making this possible.

References

Bhakthavatsalam, Sindhuja, and Cartwright, Nancy. 2017. “What’s So Special about Empirical Adequacy?” European Journal for Philosophy of Science 7:445–65.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Boltzmann, Ludwig. 1968. Wissenschaftliche Abhandlungen. vol. 2. New York: Chelsea.Google Scholar
Cartwright, Nancy. 1983. How the Laws of Physics Lie. Oxford: Clarendon.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Regt, Henk W. 2017. Understanding Scientific Understanding. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Douglas, Heather E. 2009. Science, Policy and the Value-Free Ideal. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Douglas, Heather E.. 2013. “The Value of Cognitive Values.” Philosophy of Science 80 (Proceedings): 796–806.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Elgin, Catherine Z. 2017. True Enough. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Khalifa, Kareem. 2017. Understanding, Explanation, and Scientific Knowledge. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kitcher, Philip. 2007. Living with Darwin. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Lipton, Peter. 2009. “Understanding without Explanation.” In Scientific Understanding: Philosophical Perspectives, ed. de Regt, H. W., Leonelli, S., and Eigner, K., 43–63. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maxwell, James Clerk. 1877. “The Kinetic Theory of Gases.” Nature 16:242–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maxwell, James Clerk. 1986. Maxwell on Molecules and Gases, ed. Garber, E., Brush, S. G., and Francis Everitt, C. W.. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Morrison, Margaret. 1999. “Models as Autonomous Agents.” In Models as Mediators, ed. Morgan, M.S. and Morrison, M., 38–65. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Popper, Karl R. 1972. Objective Knowledge. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
Potochnik, Angela. 2017. Idealization and the Aims of Science. Chicago: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suárez, Mauricio. 2010. “Scientific Representation.” Philosophy Compass 5:91–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Fraassen, Bas C. 1980. The Scientific Image. Oxford: Clarendon.CrossRefGoogle Scholar