The distinction between the contexts of discovery and justification has had a turbulent career in philosophy of science. At times celebrated as the hallmark of philosophical approaches to science, at times condemned as ambiguous, distorting, and misleading, the distinction dominated philosophical debates from the early decades of the twentieth century to the 1980s. In recent years, the distinction has vanished from philosophers’ official agenda. However, even though it is rarely explicitly addressed, it still informs our conception of the content, domain, and goals of philosophy of science. The fact that new developments in philosophy of experimentation and history and sociology of science have been marginalized by traditional scholarship in philosophy indicates that the context distinction still pervades philosophical thinking about science. This volume helps clear the grounds for the productive and fruitful integration of these new developments into philosophy of science.We identify several focal points for the re-assessment of the distinction: the original contexts, especially the work of the Logical Empiricists, its alleged forerunners in the nineteenth century, and its evolution and dissemination throughout the twentieth century.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
REFERENCES
Ankeny, R. (2000), “Fashioning Descriptive Models in Biology: Of Worms and Wiring Diagrams,” Philosophy of Science 67 (supplement): S260–S272.
Baird, Davis (2004), Thing Knowledge: A Philosophy of Scientific Instruments (Berkeley: University of California Press).
Bechtel, William (1994), “Deciding on the Data: Epistemological Problems Surrounding Instruments and Research Techniques in Cell Biology,” PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association, pp. 167–178.
Bechtel, William and Robert Richardson (1993), Discovering Complexity (Princeton: Princeton University Press).
Benschop, Ruth and Douwe Draaisma (2000), “In Pursuit of Precision. The Calibration of Minds and Machines in Late Nineteenth-Century Psychology,” Annals of Science 57: 1–25.
Bresadola, Marco (2003), “At Play With Nature: Luigi Galvani's Experimental Approach to Muscular Physiology”, in F. L. Holmes et al. (eds.), Reworking the Bench: Research Notebooks in the History of Science (Dordrecht, Boston and London: Kluwer), pp. 67–92.
Buchanan, B. G. (1985), “Steps Toward Mechanizing Discovery”, in K. Schaffner (ed.), Logic of Discovery and Diagnosis in Medicine (Berkeley: University of California Press), pp. 94–114.
Buchwald, Jed Z. (ed.) (1995). Scientific Practice. Theories and Stories of Doing Physics (Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press).
Burian, Richard M. (1977), “More Than a Marriage of Convenience: On the Inextricability of History and Philosophy of Science,” Philosophy of Science 44: 1–42.
Cartwright, Nancy, Jordi Cat et al. (1996), Otto Neurath: Philosophy Between Science and Politics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
Chalmers, Alan (2003), “The Theory-Dependence of the Use of Instruments in Science,” Philosophy of Science 70: 493–509.
Collins, Harry (1985), Changing Order: Replication and Induction in Scientific Practice (London: Sage).
Cooter, Roger (1984), The Cultural Meaning of Popular Science: Phrenology and the Organization of Consent in Nineteenth Century Britain (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
Craver, Carl F. (2001), “Role Functions, Mechanisms, and Hierarchy,” Philosophy of Science 68: 53–74.
Creager, Angela (2002), The Life of a Virus: Tobacco Mosaic Virus as an Experimental Model, 1930–1965 (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press).
Culp, Sylvia (1995), “Objectivity in Experimental Inquiry: Breaking the Data-Technique Circles,” Philosophy of Science 62: 430–150.
Darden, Lindley (1990), “Diagnosing and Fixing Faults in Theories”, in J. Shrager and P. Langley (eds.), Computational Models of Scientific Discovery andTheory Formation (SanMateo: Morgan Kaufman), pp. 319–346.
Darden, Lindley (1991), Theory Change in Science: Strategies from Mendelian Genetics (New York: Oxford University Press).
Darden, Lindley (1996), “Essay Review. Generalizations in Biology,” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 27: 409–419.
Darden, Lindley (1997), “Recent Work in Computational Scientific Discovery”, in M. Shafto and P. W. Langley (eds.), Proceedings of the Nineteenth Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum), pp. 161–166.
Darden, Lindley (1998). Discovery, Evaluation, Revision: Cycles in Scientific Change (abstract). International Congress on Discovery and Creativity, Ghent.
Dror, Otniel E. (1999), “The Scientific Image of Emotion: Experience and Technologies of Inscription,” Configurations 7: 355–401.
Elliot, Kevin (2004), “Error as Means to Discovery,” Philosophy of Science 71: 1–24.
Feigenbaum, E. A., B. G. Buchanan et al. (1971), “On Generality and Problem Solving: A Case Study Using the DENDRAL Program,” Machine Intelligence 6: 165–190.
Feigl, Herbert (1970), “Beyond Peaceful Coexistence”, in R. H. Stuewer (ed.), Historical and Philosophical Perspectives of Science (New York et al.: Gordon and Breach), pp. 3–11.
Franklin, Allan (1986), The Neglect of Experiment (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
Franklin, Allan (1994), “How to Avoid the Experimenters’ Regress,” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 25: 463–491.
Franklin, Allan (1999), Can That Be Right? (Dordrecht, Boston and London: Kluwer).
Friedman, Michael (1999), Reconsidering Logical Positivism (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
Gaudillière, Jean-Paul (2001), “Mapping as Technology: Genes, Mutant Mice, and Biomedical Research, 1910–1965”, in B. Joerges and T. Shinn (eds.), Instrumentation. Between Science, State and Industry, Sociology of the Sciences Yearbook XXII (Dordrecht: Kluwer), pp. 29–48.
Giere, Ronald (1973), “History and Philosophy of Science: Intimate Relationship or Marriage of Convenience?,” British Journal for Philosophy of Science 24: 282–297.
Giere, Ronald N. and Alan W. Richardson (1996), Origins of Logical Empiricism (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press).
Gieryn, Thomas F. (1999), Cultural Boundaries of Science: Credibility on the Line (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press).
Glennan, Stuart (1996), “Mechanisms and the Nature of Causation,” Erkenntnis 44: 49–71.
Golinski, Jan (1992), Science as Public Culture. Chemistry and Enlightenment in Britain, 1760–1820 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
Gooding, David (1990), Experiment and the Making of Meaning (Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers).
Gooding, David, Trevor Pinch et al. (eds.) (1989), The Uses of Experiment. Studies in the Natural Sciences (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
Grasshoff, Gerd, R. Casties et al. (2000), Zur Theorie des Experimentes. Untersuchungen am Beispiel der Entdeckung des Harnstoffzyklus (Bern: Bern Studies for the History and Philosophy of Science).
Graßhoff, Gerd and Michael May (1995), “Methodische Analyse wissenschaftlichen Entdeckens,” Kognitionswissenschaft 5: 51–67.
Hacking, Ian (1983), Representing and Intervening (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
Hacking, Ian (1990), The Taming of Chance (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
Hacking, Ian (1995), Rewriting the Soul. Multiple Personality and the Sciences of Memory (Princeton: Princeton University Press).
Hacking, Ian (1999), “Historical Meta-Epistemology”, in W. Carl and L. Daston (eds.), Wahrheit und Geschichte (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht), pp. 53–77.
Hankins, Thomas L. and Robert J. Silverman (1995), Instruments and the Imagination (Princeton: Princeton University Press).
Hanson, Norwood Russell (1958), Patterns of Discovery (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
Harwood, William S. (2004), “A New Model for Inquiry. Is the Scientific Method Dead?,” Journal of College Science Teaching 33.
Heidelberger, Michael and Friedrich Steinle (eds.) (1998), Experimental Essays-Versuche über das Experiment (Baden-Baden: Nomos).
Hoyningen-Huene, Paul (1987), “Context of Discovery and Context of Justification,” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 18: 501–515.
Joerges, Bernward and Terry Shinn (eds.) (2001), Instrumentation. Between Science, State and Industry (Dordrecht: Kluwer).
Kitcher, Philip (2001), Science, Truth, and Democracy (Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press).
Knorr-Cetina, Karin (1981), The Manufacture of Knowledge (Oxford: Pergamon Press).
Kordig, Carl (1978), “Discovery and Justification,” Philosophy of Science 45: 110–117.
Krüger, Lorenz (1979), History and Philosophy of Science—A Marriage for the Sake of Reason. Abstracts 6: 6th International Congress for Logic, Methodology, and Philosophy of Science (Hannover: Dr. Bönecke), pp. 108–112.
Kuhn, Thomas S. (1962), “The Structure of Scientific Revolutions”, in O. Neurath et al. (eds.), Encyclopedia of Unified Science, vol. I (Chicago: University of Chicago Press).
Lakatos, Imre (1970), “Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes”, in I. Lakatos and A. Musgrave (eds.), Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge (London: Cambridge University Press), pp. 91–195.
Lakatos, Imre and Alan Musgrave (eds.) (1970), Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
Langley, P., Herbert A. Simon et al. (1987), Scientific Discovery: Computational Explorations of the Creative Processes (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press).
Laudan, Larry (1977), Progress and its Problems (Berkeley: University of California Press).
Laudan, Larry (1980), “Why Was the Logic of Discovery Abandoned?”, in T. Nickles (ed.), Scientific Discovery, vol. I (Dordrecht: Reidel), pp. 173–183.
Longino, Helen E. (2002), The Fate of Knowledge (Princeton: Princeton University Press).
Losee, John (1979), A Historical Introduction to the Philosophy of Science, 2nd edition (Oxford: Oxford University Press).
Machamer, Peter, Lindley Darden et al. (2000), “Thinking About Mechanisms,” Philosophy of Science 67: 1–25.
Mayo, Deborah G. (2000), “Experimental Practice and an Error Statistical Account of Evidence,” Philosophy of Science. Supplement 67: S193–S207.
McLaughlin, Robert (1982), “Invention and Induction. Laudan, Simon and the Logic of Discovery,” Philosophy of Science 49: 198–211.
McMullin, Ernan (1990), “The Development of Philosophy of Science 1600–1900”, in R. C. Olby et al. (eds.), Companion to the History of Modern Science (London and New York), pp. 816–837.
Morus, Iwan Rhys (1998), Frankenstein’s Children: Electricity, Exhibition, and Experiment in Early-Nineteenth-Century London (Princeton: Princeton University Press).
Nersessian, Nancy J. (1995), “Opening the Black Box: Cognitive Science and History of Science,” Osiris: A Research Journal Devoted to the History of Science and its Cultural Influences 10: 194–211.
Nickles, Thomas (1980a), “Introductory Essay: Scientific Discovery and the Future of Philosophy of Science”, in T. Nickles (ed.), Scientific Discovery, Logic, and Rationality (Dordrecht: Reidel), pp. 1–59.
Nickles, Thomas (ed.) (1980b), Scientific Discovery, Logic, and Rationality (Dordrecht: Reidel).
Nickles, Thomas (1985), “Beyond Divorce: Current Status of the Discovery Debate,” Philosophy of Science 52: 177–206.
Radder, Hans (2003), “Toward a More Developed Philosophy of Scientific Experimentation”, in H. Radder (ed.), Philosophy of Scientific Experimentation (Pittsburgh: Pittsburgh University Press), pp. 1–18.
Rader, Karen (1999), “Of Mice, Medicine, and Genetics: CC Little’s Creation of the Inbred Laboratory Mouse, 1909–1918,” Studies in History and Philosophy of Biology and Biomedical Sciences 30: 319.
Rasmussen, Nicolas (1993), “Facts, Artifacts, and Mesosomes: Practicing Epistemology with the Electron Microscope,” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 24: 227–265.
Reichenbach, Hans (1938), Experience and Prediction. An Analysis of the Foundations and the Structure of Knowledge (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press).
Rheinberger, Hans-Jörg (1997), Toward a History of Epistemic Things (Stanford: Stanford University Press).
Rudge, David Wyss (2001), “Kettlewell from an Error Statistician’s Point of View,” Perspectives on Science 9: 59–77.
Salmon, Wesley C. (1970), “Bayes's Theorem and the History of Science”, in R. H. Stuewer (ed.), Historical and Philosophical Perspectives of Science (New York et al.: Gordon and Breach), pp. 68–86.
Schaffer, Simon (1986), “Scientific Discoveries and the End of Natural Philosophy,” Social Studies of Science 16: 387–120.
Schaffner, Kenneth (1980), “Discovery in the Biomedical Sciences: Logic or Irrational Intuition?”, in T. Nickles (ed.), Scientific Discovery: Case Studies, Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science, vol. 60 (Dordrecht: Reidel), pp. 171–205.
Simon, Herbert A and D. Kulkarni (1988), “The Process of Scientific Discovery: The Strategy of Experimentation,” Cognitive Science 12: 139–175.
Simon, Herbert A. (1973), “Does Scientific Discovery Have a Logic?,” Philosophy of Science 40: 471–480.
Simon, Herbert A., Patrick W. Langley et al. (1981), “Scientific Discovery as Problem Solving,” Synthese 47: 1–28.
Stadler, Friedrich (1997), Studien zum Wiener Kreis (Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp).
Steinle, Friedrich (2005), Explorative Experimente. Ampére, Faraday und die Urspriinge der Elektro-dynamik. Boethius 50. (Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag).
Steinle, Friedrich and Richard M. Burian (2003), “Special Issue: History of Science and Philosophy of Science,” Perspectives on Science 10.
Uebel, Thomas E. (ed.) (1991), Rediscovering the Forgotten Vienna Circle. Austrian Studies on Otto Neurath and the Vienna Circle (Dordrecht, Boston and London: Kluwer Academic Publishers).
Weber, Marcel (2005), Philosophy of Experimental Biology (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
Winter, Alison (1998), Mesmerized: Powers of Mind in Victorian Britain (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press).
Yeo, Richard (1993), Defining Science. William Whewell, Natural Knowledge, and Public Debate in Early Victorian Britai (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2006 Springer
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
SCHICKORE, J., STEINLE, F. (2006). INTRODUCTION: REVISITING THE CONTEXT DISTINCTION. In: SCHICKORE, J., STEINLE, F. (eds) Revisiting Discovery and Justification. Archimedes, vol 14. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-4251-5_1
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-4251-5_1
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-1-4020-4250-8
Online ISBN: 978-1-4020-4251-5
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawPhilosophy and Religion (R0)