Idealizations and scientific understanding

Philosophical Studies

Volumn 160, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 237-252

  Mizrahi, Moti ^a  

^a CITY UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK   (United States)

Author keywords

Gas laws; Ideal gas law; Scientific idealization; Scientific understanding

Indexed keywords

EID: 84865440966     PISSN: 00318116     EISSN: 15730883     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s11098-011-9716-3     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Ashkenazi, G., Gordon, J., & Hofstein, J. (2008). Similarity and difference in the behavior of gases: a demonstration. Journal of Chemical Education, 85(1), 72.
2. Bird, A. (2007). What is scientific progress? Nous, 41(1), 64-89.
3. Bovens, L., Hoefer, C., & Hartmann, S. (Eds.). (2008). Nancy Cartwright's philosophy of science. New York: Routledge.
4. Cartwright, N. (1989). Nature's capacities and their measurement. New York: Oxford University Press.
5. Cartwright, N. (1999). The Dappled World: a study of the boundaries of science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
6. Contessa, G. (2010). Scientific models and fictional objects. Synthese, 172, 215-229.
7. Dilworth, C. (2007). Scientific progress: a study concerning the nature of the relation between successive scientific theories. New York: Springer.
8. Elgin, C. (2002). Creation as reconfiguration: art in the advancement of science. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 16, 13-25.
9. Elgin, C. (2004). True enough. Philosophical Issues, 14, 113-131.
10. Elgin, C. (2007). Understanding and the facts. Philosophical Studies, 132, 33-42.
11. Elgin, C. (2009). Exemplification, idealization, and scientific understanding. In M. Suarez (Ed.), Fictions in science: philosophical essays on modeling and idealization (pp. 77-90). New York: Routledge.
12. Feynman, R. P. (1965). The character of physical law. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
13. Gibbard, A., & Varian, H. (1978). Economic models. Journal of Philosophy, 75, 664-677.
14. Giere, R. N. (1988). Explaining science: a cognitive approach. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
15. Giere, R. N. (2004). How models are used to represent reality. Philosophy of Science, 71, 742-752.
16. Giere, R. N. (2009). Why scientific models should not be regarded as works of fiction. In M. Suarez (Ed.), Fictions in science: philosophical essays on modeling and idealization (pp. 248-258). New York: Routledge.
17. Godfrey-Smith, P. (2006). The strategy of model-based science. Biology and Philosophy, 21, 725-740.
18. Godfrey-Smith, P. (2009). Models and fictions in science. Philosophical Studies, 143, 101-116.
19. Grimm, S. R. (2006). Is understanding a species of knowledge? British Journal for the Philosophy for Science, 57, 515-535.
20. Kitcher, P. (1993). The advancement of science: science without legend, objectivity without illusions. New York: Oxford University Press.
21. Kosso, P. (2007). Scientific understanding. Foundations of Science, 12, 173-188.
22. Kvanvig, J. L. (2003). The value of knowledge and the pursuit of understanding. New York: Cambridge University Press.
23. Kvanvig, J. L. (2009). Responses to critics. In A. Haddock, A. Millar, & D. Pritchard (Eds.), Epistemic value (pp. 339-353). New York: Oxford University Press.
24. Longrigg, J. (1998). Greek Medicine from the heroic to the hellenistic age: a sourcebook. New York: Routledge.
25. Losee, J. (2004). Theories of scientific progress. London: Routledge.
26. McMullin, E. (1985). Galilean idealization. Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science, 16, 247-273.
27. Pan, H., Ritter, J. A., & Balbuena, P. B. (1998). Examination of the approximations used in determining the isosteric heat of adsorption from the Clausius-Clapeyron equation. Langmuir, 14, 6323-6327.
28. Pauling, L. (1988). General Chemistry. New York: Dover Publications.
29. Piccinini, G. (2003). Epistemic divergence and the publicity of scientific methods. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 34, 597-612.
30. Pritchard, D. (2009). Knowledge, understanding and epistemic value. In A. O'Hear (Ed.), Epistemology (pp. 19-43). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
31. Psillos, S. (1999). Scientific realism: how science tracks truth. New York: Routledge.
32. Salmon, W. (1993). The value of scientific understanding. Philosophica, 51, 9-19.
33. Salmon, W. (1998). Causality and explanation. New York: Oxford University Press.
34. Schurz, G., & Lambert, K. (1994). Outline of a theory of scientific understanding. Synthese, 101(1), 65-120.
35. Suarez, M. (Ed.). (2009). Fictions in science: philosophical essays on modeling and idealization. New York: Routledge.
36. Thucydides. (2007). (431 B. C. E/2007) History of the Peloponnesian War. In R. Crawley (Eds.) Available from http://ebooks. adelaide. edu. au/t/thucydides/crawley/index. html. Accessed 22 Feb 2010.
37. Toulmin, S. (1961). Foresight and understanding. New York: Harper and Row.
38. Weber, E. (1996). Explaining, understanding and scientific theories. Erkenntnis, 44, 1-23.
39. Weisberg, M. (2007). Who is a Modeler? British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 58, 207-233.
40. Whitten, K., Davis, R., Peck, M., & Stanley, G. (2010). Chemistry (Ninth ed.). Belmont: Brooks/Cole, Cengage Learning.
41. Zagzebski, L. (2001). Recovering understanding. In M. Steup (Ed.), Knowledge, truth, and duty: essays on epistemic justification, responsibility, and virtue (pp. 235-256). New York: Oxford University Press.
42. Zumdahl, S. (2008). Introductory chemistry (Sixth ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.