On the relation between experiment and thought experiment in the natural sciences;Zum Verhältnis zwischen Experiment und Gedankenexperiment in den Naturwissenschaften

Journal for General Philosophy of Science

Volumn 38, Issue 2, 2007, Pages 219-237

  Buzzoni, Marco ^a,b  

^a Università di Macerata ^*  (Italy)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MACERATA   (Italy)

Author keywords

Experiment; New experimentalism; Technical operationalism; Thought experiment

Indexed keywords

EID: 37049010271     PISSN: 09254560     EISSN: 15728587     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10838-007-9032-y     Document Type: Article

References (93)

1. Achinstein P., Hannaway O. (eds) (1985). Observation, experiment, and hypothesis in modern physical science. Cambridge, MA, MIT Press
2. Ackermann R.J. (1985). Data, instruments, and theory: A dialectical approach to understanding science. Princeton, Princeton University Press
3. Atkinson D. (2003). Experiments and thought experiments in natural science. In: Galavotti M.C. (eds) Observation and experiment in the natural and social sciences. Dordrecht, Kluwer, pp. 209-225
4. Atkinson D., Peijnenburg J. (2004). Galileo and prior philosophy. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 35, 115-136
5. Arthur R. (1999). On thought experiments as a priori science. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 13, 215-229
6. Bishop M.A. (1999). Why thought experiments are not arguments. Philosophy of Science 66, 534-541
7. Boniolo G. (1997). On a unified theory of models and thought experiments in natural sciences. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 10(2): 121-142
8. Brown J.R. (1986). Thought experiments since the scientific revolution. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 1, 1-14
9. Brown J.R. (1991a). Laboratory of the mind: Thought experiments in the natural sciences. London, Routledge
10. Brown, J. R. (1991b). Thought experiments: A platonic account. In T. Horowitz & G. J. Massey (Eds.) 119-128.
11. Brown, J. R. (1993). Why empiricism won't work. In D. Hull et al. (Eds.) pp. 271-279.
12. Brown J.R. (1997). Proofs and pictures. The British Journal for the Philosophy of Sciences 48, 161-180
13. Brown J.R. (2004). Why thought experiments transcend empiricism. In: Hitchcock C. (eds) Contemporary debates in philosophy of science. Malden, Blackwell, pp. 23-43
14. Bunzl M. (1996). The logic of thought experiments. Synthese 106, 227-240
15. Buschlinger W. (1993). Denk-Kapriolen? Gedankenexperimente in Naturwissenschaften, Ethik und Philosophy of Mind. Würzburg, Königshausen+Neumann
16. Buzzoni, M. (1986a). Semantica, ontologia ed ermeneutica della conoscenza scientifica. Saggio su T.S. Kuhn, Mailand: Angeli.
17. Buzzoni M. (1986b). 'L'operazionismo e il problema dei termini teorici. Epistemologia 9, 39-76
18. Buzzoni M. (1995). Scienza e tecnica. Teoria ed esperienza nelle scienze della natura. Rom, Studium
19. Buzzoni M. (1997). Erkenntnistheoretische und ontologische Probleme der theoretischen Begriffe. Journal for General Philosophy of Science 28, 19-53
20. Buzzoni M. (2004). Esperimento ed esperimento mentale. Mailand, Angeli
21. Buzzoni, M. (2005). Kuhn und Wittgenstein: Paradigmen, Sprachspiele und Wissenschaftsgeschichte. In F. Stadler, M. Stöltzner (Hrsg.), Zeit und Geschichte/time and history (pp. 38-40). Kirchberg a.W.: Ludwig Wittgenstein Gesellschaft.
22. Cartwright N. (1983). How the laws of physics lie. Oxford, Oxford Univ. Press
23. Cartwright N. (1989). Nature's capacities and their measurement. Oxford, Oxford Univ. Press
24. Dingler H. (1928). Das Experiment. Sein Wesen und seine Geschichte. München, Reinhardt
25. Dingler H. (1930). Das System. Das philosophisch-rationale Grundproblem und die exakte Methode der Philosophie. München, Reinhardt
26. Dingler H. (1938). Die Methode der Physik. München, Reinhardt
27. Dingler H. (1955). Die Ergreifung des Wirklichen. München, Eidos
28. Einstein A., Podolsky B., Rosen N. (1935). Can quantum-mechanical description of physical reality be considered complete?. Physical Review 47, 777-780
29. Forge, J. (1991). Thought experiments in the philosophy of physical science. In T. Horowitz & G. J. Massey (Eds.) pp. 209-222.
30. Galison P. (1987). How experiments end. Chicago, University of Chicago Press
31. Galison P. (1988). History, philosophy, and the central metaphor. Science in Context 2, 197-212
32. Gendler T.S. (1998). Galileo and the indispensability of scientific thought experiment. The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 49, 397-424
33. Gendler T.S. (2000). Thought experiment. On the power and limits of imaginary cases. New York, Garland
34. Genz H. (1999). Gedanken-experimente. Weinheim, Wiley-VCH
35. Giere R.N. (1988). Explaining science: A cognitive approach. Chicago, University of Chicago Press
36. Gooding D. (1982). Empiricism in practice: Teleology, economy, and observation in Faraday's physics. Isis 73, 46-67
37. Gooding D. (1990). Experiment and the making of meaning. Human agency in scientific observation and experiment. Dordrecht, Kluwer
38. Gooding D. (1992). The procedural turn; or, why do thought experiments work?. In: Giere R. (eds) Cognitive models of science. Minneapolis, University of Minnesota Press, pp. 45-76
39. Gooding, D. (1993). What is experimental about thought experiments? In D. Hull et al. (Eds.) pp. 280-290.
40. Gooding D. (1994). Imaginary science. The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 45, 1029-1045
41. Gooding, D. (1998). Picturing experimental practice. In Heidelberger & Steinle (Hrsg.) pp. 298-322.
42. Hacking I. (1983). Representing and intervening: introductory topics in the philosophy of natural science. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press
43. Hacking I. (1992). The self-vindication of the laboratory sciences. In: Pickering A. (eds) Science as practice and culture. Chicago, University of Chicago Press, pp. 29-64
44. Hacking, I. (1993). Do thought experiments have a life of their own? Comments on James Brown, Nancy Nersessian and David Gooding. In D. Hull et al. (Eds.) 302-308.
45. Hacking I. (1999). The social construction of what?. Cambridge, Harvard University Press
46. Heidelberger, M. & Steinle, F. (hrsg.): 1998, Experimental Essays - Versuche zum Experiment. Baden-Baden: Nomos.
47. Hempel C.G. (1965). Aspects of scientific explanation and other essays in the philosophy of science. New York, Free Press
48. Hintikka J. (1988). What is the logic of experimental inquiry?. Synthese 74, 173-188
49. Hintikka, J. (1993). Theory-ladenness of observations as a test case of Kuhn's approach to scientific inquiry. Hull et al. (Eds.) pp. 277-286.
50. Hon, G. (1998). If this be error. Probing experiment with error. In M. Heidelberger & F. Steinle (Hrsg.) 1998, pp. 227-248.
51. Horowitz T., Massey G.J. (eds) (1991). Thought experiments in science and philosophy. Savage MD, Rowman & Littlefield
52. Hull, D., Forbes, M., & Okruhlik, K. (Eds.). (1993). PSA 1992, 2, Philosophy of Science Association, East Lansing, MI.
53. Irvine, A. D. (1991). Thought experiments in scientific reasoning. In T. Horowitz & G. J. Massey (Eds.) pp. 149-166.
54. Janis, A. I. (1991). Can thought experiments fail? In T. Horowitz & G. J. Massey (Eds.) pp. 113-118.
55. Koyré A. (1939). Études galiléennes. Paris, Hermann
56. Kuhn, Th. S. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. zit. nach d. 2. Aufl., 1970.
57. Kuhn, Th. S. (1964). A function for thought experiments. In R. Taton et I. B. Cohen (dir.), L'aventure de la science, Mélanges Alexandre Koyré. vol. II, Paris: Hermann, 307-337;
58. wiedergedruckt in u. zit. nach T.S. Kuhn, The Essential Tension: Selected Studies in Scientific Tradition and Change. Chicago (Ill.): University of Chicago Press. 1977, 240-265,
59. dt. Üb.: Die Entstehung des Neuen. Frankfurt a.M: Suhrkamp, 1977, 327-356.
60. Kühne U. (2005). Die Methode des Gedankenexperiments. Frankfurt a.M, Suhrkamp
61. Laymon, R. (1985). Idealizations and the testing of theories by experimentation. In P. Achinstein & O. Hannaway (Eds.) pp. 147-173.
62. Laymon, R. (1991). Thought experiments by Stevin, Mach and Gouy: Thought experiments as ideal limits and as semantic domains. In T. Horowitz & G. J. Massey (Eds.) pp. 167-191.
63. Mach, E. (1883). Die Mechanik in ihrer Entwickelung. Historisch-kritisch dargestellt, Leipzig: Brockhaus zit. nach der 9. Aufl., Leipzig 1933.
64. Mach E. (1896/1897). Über Gedankenexperimente. Zeitschrift für den physikalischen und chemischen Unterricht 10, 1-5
65. Mach, E. (1905a). Über Gedankenexperimente. Erkenntnis und Irrtum. Leipzig: Barth. zit. nach der 5. Aufl., 1926, 183-200.
66. Mach, E. (1905b). Das physische Experiment und dessen Leitmotive. Erkenntnis und Irrtum. Leipzig: Barth. zit. nach der 5. Aufl., 1926, 201-219.
67. Mach, E. (1905c). Die Hypothese. Erkenntnis und Irrtum, Leipzig: Barth. zit. nach der 5. Aufl., 1926, 232-250.
68. McAllister J. (1996). The evidential significance of thought experiments in science. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 27, 233-250
69. McMullin E. (1985). Galilean idealization. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 16, 247-273
70. Miščević N. (1992). Mental models and thought experiments. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 6, 215-226
71. Nersessian, N. (1991). Why do thought experiments work? Proceedings of the Cognitive Science Society, 13, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale (NJ), 430-438.
72. Nersessian, N. (1992). How do scientists think? Capturing the dynamics of conceptual change in science. R. Giere (Ed.), Cognitive models of science, (pp. 3-44). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
73. Nersessian, N. (1993). In the theoretician's laboratory: Thought experimenting as mental modeling. Hull et al. (Eds.) pp. 291-301.
74. Norton, J. (1991). Thought experiments in Einstein's work. In T. Horowitz & G. J. Massey (Eds.) pp. 129-148.
75. Norton J. (1996). Are thought experiments just what you Thought?. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 26, 333-366
76. Norton J. (2004). Why thought experiments do not transcend empiricism. In: Hitchcock C. (eds) Contemporary debates in philosophy of science. Malden, Blackwell, pp. 44-66
77. Nowak, L. (1971). U podstaw marksowskiej metodologii nauk, Warszawa: Państwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe.
78. Nowak, L. (1992). The idealizational approach to science: A survey. In J. Brzeziński, & L. Nowak, Idealization III. Approximation and truth. (pp. 9-63). Amsterdam: Rodopi.
79. Palmieri P. (2003). Mental models in Galileo's early mathematization of nature. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 34, 229-264
80. Popper, K. R. (1959). The logic of scientific discovery. London: Hutchinson. zit. nach der 2. Aufl. 1968.
81. Poser, H. (1984). Wovon handelt ein Gedankenexperiment? H.P. Poser & H.-W. Schütt (hrsg.), Ontologie und Wissenschaft. Philosophische und wissenschaftstheoretische Untersuchungen zur Frage der Objektkonstitution (Technische Universität Berlin) 19, 181-198.
82. Radder H. (1988). The material realization of science. Assen, van Gorckum
83. Radder H. (1996). In and about the world. Philosophical studies of science and technology. New York, State University of New York Press
84. Schlesinger G.N. (1996). The power of thought experiments. Foundations of Physics 26, 467-482
85. Sexl R.U., Urbantke H.K. (1975). Gravitation und Kosmologie. Eine Einführung in die Allgemeine Relativitätstheorie. Zürich, Bibliographisches Institut
86. Sorensen Roy A. (1992). Thought experiments. Oxford, Oxford University Press
87. Stäudner, F. (1998). Virtuelle Erfahrung. Eine Untersuchung über den Erkenntniswert von Gedankenexperimenten und Computersimulationen in den Naturwissenschaften. Diss. Friedrich-Schiller-Universität, Jena.
88. Stöltzner M. (2002). The dynamics of thought experiments - comments to Atkinson. http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/documents/disks0/00/00/06/26, 17.12.2002.
89. Weber, M. (1904). Die'Objektivität' sozialwissenschaftlicher und sozialpolitischer Erkenntnis. Archiv für Sozialwissenschaft und Sozialpolitik, 19, 22-87
90. wiederabgedruckt in Gesammelte Aufsätze zur Wissenschaftslehre, Mohr, Tübingen, 1922, zit. nach der 5. Aufl., 1982, 146-214.
91. Weber, M. (1906). Kritische Studien auf dem Gebiet der kulturwissenschaftlichen Logik. Archiv für Sozialwissenschaft und Sozialpolitik, 22, 143-207
92. wiederabgedruckt in Gesammelte Aufsätze zur Wissenschaftslehre, Mohr, Tübingen, 1922, zit. nach der 5. Aufl., 1982, 215-290.
93. Witt-Hansen J. (1976). H. C. Örsted, Immanuel Kant, und the thought experiment. Danish Yearbook of Philosophy 13, 48-65