Abstract
Empirical insights have proven fruitful for the advancement of Philosophy of Science, but the integration of philosophical concepts and qualitative empirical data poses considerable methodological challenges. Debates in Integrated History and Philosophy of Science suggest that the advancement of philosophical knowledge can take place through the integration of empirical or historical research into philosophical studies, as Chang, Nersessian, Thagard and Schickore argue. Building upon their contributions, we will develop a blueprint for an Empirical Philosophy of Science that draws upon qualitative methods from the social sciences in order to advance our philosophical understanding of science in practice. We will regard the relationship between philosophical conceptualization and empirical data as an iterative dialogue between theory and data, which is guided by a particular ‘feeling with’ the empirical phenomenon under study. On the basis of our own experience, we will explain how this dialogical interplay between conceptual discourse and empirical insight manifests itself when analysing the practices of infectious disease modelling and a team of planetary scientists. Thereby, we offer not only practical examples, but also a framework for further reflection on the methodology of an Empirical Philosophy of Science.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Empirical philosophy as a concept is not well established in the discourse of philosophy of science. But in her study on the multiple perspectives and practices involved in the treatment of atherosclerosis as a disease, Mol (2002) argues for an ‘empirical philosophy’ that employs ethnographic methods and interests in order to address epistemological questions in knowledge practices. In a similar vein, we introduce qualitative empirical insights to the philosophical discourses, such as nature of scientific models.
- 2.
Lakatos famously has argued that historical case studies on science without philosophical conceptualization are “blind” (Lakatos 1971: 91). He thus has favoured a history of science under the patronage of Philosophy of Science. This position has been harshly criticized not the least by Kuhn: “What Lakatos conceives as history is not history at all but philosophy fabricating examples” (Kuhn 1971: 143).
- 3.
Knorr-Cetina’s interest in object-centred sociality stems from a broader concern for forms of sociality in highly individualized, contemporary societies. It is her intention to explore notions of sociality with the help of models which she regards as “metaphors or tools to try out on the problem at hand” (Knorr-Cetina 1997, p. 20). Her description of the researcher-object relationship is intended to be metaphorical. However, other accounts of scientific practice such as Polanyi’s stress that emotions such as the intimate care expressed in Fox Keller’s ‘feeling for the organism’ do in fact operate and are epistemically effective.
- 4.
Collins (1991) sees a difference between historical and sociological studies of science in terms of distance. Historians are capable of distancing themselves from their objects of study due to the time-scale of their studies, whereas sociologists are able to provide in-depth insights based on their closeness to the object of study. So, in our empirical work, we make use of the potential offered by social scientific methods, which promote a reflected-on proximity between researcher and the phenomenon under study.
- 5.
Buber takes a rather radical standpoint on his “I-Thou” relationship: “The relation to the You is unmediated. Nothing conceptual intervenes between I and You, no prior knowledge and no imagination […]” (Buber 1970, p. 62). Clearly, we do not follow Buber in this regard, as we regard the abstract, i.e. the conceptual broadly conceived, as integral part of those experiences which matter to empirical fieldwork.
- 6.
Currently the Aalto University of Technology.
- 7.
Currently the National Institute for Health and Welfare.
- 8.
Iteration itself means “repetition of an action or process”; repeated performance, if we follow a dictionary definition (OED).
- 9.
A mathematical modeller and an epidemiologist said that “we are able to play with models,” which depicted their close collaboration and mutual understanding (cf. Mattila 2006).
- 10.
On the integration of observation with interviewing for qualitative empirical inquiry see e.g. Coffey and Atkinson (1996).
- 11.
I have not gone so far as to employ openly ‘collaborative’ interviewing as described by Ellis and Berger (2003). I have restrained myself to asking questions, elaborating on these questions and offering reformulations. In single instances have I explained in simple terms how ‘some philosophers would think about’ the issue in questions. I have not, however, confronted interviewees with an elaborate description of my tentative, theoretically informed perspective.
- 12.
In contrast to e.g. Hasu and Miettinen (2006), my dialogical approach carries no ‘interventionist’ motivation.
- 13.
References
Alexa, M., Zuell, C.: Text analysis software: Commonalities, differences and limitations: The results of a review. Qual. Quant. 34, 299–321 (2000)
Ankeny, R., Chang, H., et al.: Introduction: Philosophy of Science in Practice. Eur. J. Philos. Sci. 1(3), 303–307 (2011)
Attride-Stirling, J.: Thematic networks: an analytic tool for qualitative research. Qual. Res. 1, 385–405 (2001)
Auranen, K.: On Bayesian modelling of recurrent infections. Doctor of Philosophy Article, Rolf Nevanlinna Institute, University of Helsinki (1999)
Bogner, A., Menz, W.: The theory-generating expert interview: epistemological interest, forms of knowledge, interaction. In: Bogner, A., Littig, B., Menz, W. (eds.) Interviewing Experts, 43–80. Basingstoke, Palgrave (2009)
Boyatzis, R.E.: Transforming Qualitative Information Thematic Analysis and Code Development. Sage, London, New Delhi (1998)
Braun, V., Clarke, V.: Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual. Res. Psychol. 3, 77–101 (2006)
Buber, M.: I and Thou. Touchstone, New York (1970)
Burian, R.M.: The dilemma of case studies resolved: the virtues of using case studies in the history and philosophy of science. Perspect. Sci. 9(4), 383–404 (2001)
Callon, M.: Struggles and Negotiations to Define What Is Problematic and What Is Not. The Socio-logic of Translation. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (1980)
Chang, H.: Inventing Temperature. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2004)
Chang, H.: The philosophical grammar of scientific practice. Int. Stud. Philos. Sci. 25(3), 205–221 (2011)
Chang, H.: Beyond case-studies: History as Philosophy. In: Mauskopf, S., Schmaltz, T. (eds.) Integrating History and Philosophy of Science, 109–124. Springer, Dordrecht (2012)
Coffey, A., Atkinson, P.: Making Sense of Qualitative Data. Complementary Research Strategies. Sage, London (1996)
Collins, H.M.: History and sociology of science and history and methodology of economics. In: De Marchi, N., Blaug, M. (eds.) Appraising Economic Theories: Studies in the Methodology of Research Programs, 492–498. Edward Elgar Publishing Hunts, England (1991)
Crabtree, B.F., Miller, W.L.: A template approach to text analysis: developing and using codebooks. In: Crabtree, B.F., Miller, W.L. (eds.) Doing Qualitative Research: Multiple Strategies, 93–109. Sage, Newbury, London (1992)
Czarniawska, B.: Shadowing and other techniques for doing fieldwork in modern societies. Malmoe, København, Oslo, Liber/CBS/Universitetsforlaget (2007)
de Sousa, R.: The Rationality of Emotion. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA (1987)
Douglas, H.: Engagement for progress: applied philosophy of science in context. Synthese 177, 317–335 (2010)
Elliott, K.C.: Epistemic and methodological iteration in scientific research. Stud. Hist. Philos. Sci. 43, 376–382 (2012)
Ellis, C., Berger, L.: Their story/my story/our story: including the researcher’s experience in interview research. In: Holstein, J.A., Gubrium, J.F. (eds.) Inside Interviewing. New Lenses, New Concerns, 467–494. Sage, London (2003)
Fagan, M.B.: Is there collective scientific knowledge? Arguments from explanation. Philos. Q. 61(243), 247–269 (2011)
Fehr, C., Plaisance, K.S.: Socially relevant Philosophy of Science: an introduction. Synthese 177, 301–316 (2010)
Fontana, A., Frey, J.H.: The interview: from structured questions to negotiated text. In: Denzin, N.K., Lincoln, Y.S. (eds.) Handbook of Qualitative Research, 645–672. Sage, London, New Delhi (2000)
Fox Keller, E.: A Feeling for the Organism. The life and Work of Barbara McClintock. W. H. Freeman and Company, New York (1983)
Friedman, M.S.: Martin Buber. The Life of Dialogue. University of Chicago Press, Chicago (1955)
Geertz, G.: Thick description. Toward an interpretive theory of culture. Contemporary field research. Perspectives and formulations. R. Emerson, Waveland Press, Illinois (1973/2001)
Giere, R.N.: Explaining Science. A Cognitive Approach. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago, London (1988)
Gilbert, M.: Collective belief and scientific change. In: Gilbert, M., Lanham, B. (eds.) Sociality and Responsibility: New Essays in Plural Subject Theory, 37–49. Rowman and Littlefield, New York (2000)
Hacking, I.: Representing and Intervening: Introductory Topics in the Philosophy of Natural Science. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1983)
Hacking, I.: The looping effects of human kinds. In: Sperber, D., Premack, D., Premack, A. (eds.) Causal Cognition: An Interdisciplinary Approach, 351–383. Oxford University Press, Oxford (1995)
Hakkarainen, K., Sintonen, M.: The interrogative model of inquiry and computer-supported collaborative learning. Sci. Educ. 11, 25–43 (2002)
Hardwig, J.: Epistemic dependence. J. Philos. 82(7), 335–349 (1985)
Hardwig, J.: The role of trust in knowledge. J. Philos. 88(12), 693–708 (1991)
Hasu, M., Miettinen, R.: Dialogue and intervention in Science and Technology Studies: whose point of view? Working paper series of the Center for Activity Theory and Developmental Work Research, 35, 1−43 (2006). http://www.edu.helsinki.fi/activity/publications/files/333/hasu_and_miettinen_2006.pdf
King, N., Horrocks, C.: Interviews in Qualitative Research. Sage, Thousand Oaks (2010)
Kitcher, P.: The Naturalist Return. Philos. Rev. 101, 53–114 (1992)
Knorr-Cetina, K.: The Manufacture of Knowledge: An Essay on the Constructivist and Contextual Nature of Science. Pergamon Press, Oxford (1981)
Knorr-Cetina, K.: Sociality with objects: social relations in postsocial knowledge societies. Theor. Cult. Soc. 14(4), 1–30 (1997)
Kuhn, T.S.: Notes on Lakatos. Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1970, in memory of Rudolf Carnap. In: Buck, R.C., Cohen, R.S. (eds.) Reidel Publishing, vol. 8, 137–146 (1971)
Kuhn, T.S.: The halt and the blind. Br. J. Philos. Sci. 31, 181–192 (1980)
Lakatos, I.: History of science and its rational reconstructions. Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1970, in memory of rudolf carnap. In: Buck, R.C., Cohen, R.S. (eds.) Reidel Publishing, vol. 8, 91−136 (1971)
Latour, B.: Pandora’s Hope: Essays on the Reality of Science Studies. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA (1999)
Latour, B., Woolgar, S.: Laboratory Life: The Social Construction of Scientific Facts. Sage Publications Ltd., London (1979/1986)
Mattila, E.: Questions to artificial nature: a philosophical study of interdisciplinary models and their functions in scientific practice. Philosophical studies from the University of Helsinki (2006)
Mol, A.-M.: The body multiple. Ontology in medical practice. Duke University Press, Durham, London (2002)
Morgan, M.: Models, stories and the economic world. J. Econ. Methodol. 8(3), 361–384 (2001)
Morgan, M.S., Morrison, M.: Models as Mediators: Perspectives on Natural and Social Science. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1999)
Nersessian, N.J.: The method to “meaning”: a reply to Leplin. Philos. Sci. 58(4), 678–686 (1991)
O’Malley, M.: Exploration, iterativity and kludging in synthetic biology. C. R. Chim. 14, 406–412 (2011)
Osbeck, L.M., Nersessian, N.J., Malone, K. R., Newstetter, W. C.: Science as Psychology. Sense-Making and Identity in Science Practice. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2011)
Pitt, J.C.: The dilemma of case studies: toward a heraclitian philosophy of science. Perspect. Sci. 9(4), 373–382 (2001)
Polanyi, M.: Personal Knowledge. Towards a Post-Critical Philosophy. University of Chicago Press, Chicago (1962)
Rehg, W., Staley, K.W.: The CDF collaboration and argumentation theory: the role of process in objective knowledge. Perspect. Sci. 16(1), 1–25 (2008)
Schickore, J.: More thoughts on HPS: another 20 years later. Perspect. Sci. 19(4), 453–481 (2011)
Sintonen, M.: The two aspects of method: questioning fellow inquirers and questioning nature. In: Sintonen, M. (ed.) The Socratic Tradition: Questioning as Philosophy and as Method. College Publications, UK (2004)
Sismondo, S.: Models, simulations and their objects. Sci. Context 12(2), 247–260 (1999)
Staley, K.W.: Evidential collaborations: epistemic and pragmatic considerations in ‘group belief’. Soc. Epistemol. 21(3), 249–266 (2007)
Strauss, A., Corbin, J.: Basics of Qualitative Research Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques. Sage, Newbury Park, London, New Delhi (1990)
Strauss, A.L.: Qualitative Analysis for Social Scientists. Cambridge University, New York, Cambridge (1987)
Thagard, P.: Computational Philosophy of Science. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA (1988)
Wagenknecht, S.: Opaque and translucent epistemic dependence in collaborative scientific practice. Episteme 11(4), 475−492 (2014)
Wagenknecht, S.: Facing the Incompleteness of Epistemic Trust: Managing Dependence in Scientific Practice. Social Epistemology 29(2), 160−184 (2015)
Winsberg, E.: Sanctioning models: The epistemology of simulation. Science in context 12(2), 275−292 (1999)
Wray, B.K.: The epistemic significance of collaborative research. Philos. Sci. 69, 150–168 (2002)
Wylie, A.: Thinking from Things. University of California Press, Berkeley, CA (2002)
Zuckerman, H.: Interviewing an ultra-elite. Public Opin. 32(2), 159−175 (1972)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer International Publishing Switzerland
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Mansnerus, E., Wagenknecht, S. (2015). Feeling with the Organism: A Blueprint for an Empirical Philosophy of Science. In: Wagenknecht, S., Nersessian, N., Andersen, H. (eds) Empirical Philosophy of Science. Studies in Applied Philosophy, Epistemology and Rational Ethics, vol 21. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-18600-9_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-18600-9_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-18599-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-18600-9
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawSocial Sciences (R0)