HOW TO DO THINGS WITH THEORIES: AN INTERACTIVE VIEW OF LANGUAGE AND MODELS IN SCIENCE*

The Courage of Doing Philosophy: Essays Presented to Leszek Nowak

Volumn , Issue , 2007, Pages 123-157

  Hendry, R F ^a   Psillos, Stathis ^b  

^a DURHAM UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ATHENS   (Greece)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 85142580510     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1163/9789401205368_007     Document Type: Chapter

References (44)

1. Carnap, R. (1939). Foundations of Logic and Mathematics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
2. Carnap, R. (1956). The Methodological Character of Theoretical Concepts. In: H. Feigl and M. Scriven (eds.), Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, vol. 1, pp. 38-76. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
3. Carnap, R. (2000). Theoretical Concepts in Science. (Edited with an introduction by S. Psillos.) Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 31: 151-172.
4. Cartwright, N. (1983). How the Laws of Physics Lie. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
5. da Costa, N. and S. French (1990). The Model Theoretic Approach in the Philosophy of Science. Philosophy of Science 57: 248-265.
6. Demopoulos, W. and M. Friedman (1989). The Concept of Structure in The Analysis of Matter. In: C. Wade Savage and C. Anthony Anderson (eds.), Rereading Russell (Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, vol. 12), pp. 183-199. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
7. Duhem, P. (1954 [1906]). The Aim and Structure of Physical Theory. Translated by P. P. Wiener, 1954. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
8. Francoeur, E. (1998). The Forgotten Tool: The Design and Use of Molecular Models. Social Studies of Science 27: 7-40.
9. French, S. and J. Ladyman (1998). Semantic Perspective on Idealization in Quantum Mechanics. In: N. Shanks (ed.), Idealization in Contemporary Physics (Poznań Studies in the Philosophy of the Sciences and the Humanities, vol. 63), pp. 51-73. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
10. French, S. and J. Ladyman (1999). Reinflating the Semantic Approach. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 13: 103-21.
11. Giere, R.N. (1988). Explaining Science: A Cognitive Approach. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
12. Giere, R.N. (2000). Theories. In: W.H. Newton Smith (ed.), A Companion to the Philosophy of Science. Oxford: Blackwell.
13. Goodman, N. (1968). Languages of Art. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill.
14. Hendry, R.F. (1999). Theories and Models: The Interactive View. In: R. Paton and I. Neilson (eds.), Visual Representations and Interpretations, pp. 121-130. London: Springer-Verlag.
15. Hendry, R.F. (2001). Mathematics, Representation and Molecular Structure. In: U. Klein (ed.), Tools and Modes of Representation in the Laboratory Sciences, pp. 221-236. Dordrecht: Kluwer.
16. Hendry, R.F. (forthcoming). Wave Mechanics, Matrix Mechanics and Intertheoretic Equivalence. Unpublished manuscript.
17. Hertz, H. (1893). Electric Waves. Translated by D.E. Jones. London:McMillan.
18. Hertz, H. (1955 [1894]). The Principles of Mechanics Presented in a New Form. Translated by D. E. Jones and J. T. Walley, 1955. New York: Dover.
19. Hesse, M.B. (1966). Models and Analogies in Science. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.
20. Hughes, R.I.G. (1993). Theoretical Explanation. In: P. French, T. Uehling and H. Wettstein (eds.), Midwest Studies in Philosophy, vol. 18, pp. 132-153. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.
21. Hughes, R.I.G. (1997). Models and Representation. Philosophy of Science 64 (Proceedings): S325-36.
22. Knight, D.M. (1985). Scientific Theory and Visual Language. In: A. Ellenius (ed.), The Natural Sciences and the Arts: Aspects of Interaction from the Renaissance to the 20th Century, pp. 106-124. Stockholm: Almqvist and Wiksell International. Reprinted in: D. M. Knight, Science in the Romantic Era (Aldershot: Ashgate), pp.177-95.
23. Knight, D.M. (1996). Illustrating Chemistry. In: B. S. Baigrie (ed.), Picturing Knowledge: Historical and Philosophical Problems Concerning the Use of Art in Science, pp. 135-163. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
24. Lakatos, I. (1970). Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes. In: I. Lakatos and A. Musgrave (eds.), Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge, pp. 91-196. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
25. Lloyd, E.A. (1988). The Structure and Confirmation of Evolutionary Theory. Westport: Greenwood Press.
26. Müller, F. (1997). The Equivalence Myth of Quantum Mechanics: Parts I and II. Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics 28B: 35-61 (I), 219-247 (II).
27. Newman, M. H. A. (1928). Mr. Russell’s ‘Causal Theory of Perception’. Mind 37: 137-148.
28. Nowak, L. and I. Nowakowa (2000). Idealization X: The Richness of Idealization. Poznań Studies in the Philosophy of the Sciences and the Humanities, vol. 69. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
29. Psillos, S. (1995). The Cognitive Interplay Between Theories and Models: The Case of 19th Century Optics. In: W. E. Herfel, W. Krajewski, I. Niiniluoto and R. Wójcicki (eds.), Theories and Models in Scientific Processes (Poznań Studies in the Philosophy of the Sciences and the Humanities, vol. 44), pp. 105-133. Amsterdam: Rodopi.
30. Psillos, S. (1999). Scientific Realism: How Science Tracks Truth. London: Routledge.
31. Psillos, S. (2001). Is Structural Realism Possible? Philosophy of Science (Supplement) 68: S13-24.
32. Schrödinger, E. (1928 [1926]). On the Relation between the Quantum Mechanics of Heisenberg, Born, and Jordan, and that of Schrödinger. In: Collected Papers on Wave Mechanics, pp. 45-61. London: Blackie, 1928. Originally published as: Über das Verhältnis der Heisenberg-Born-Jordanschen Quantenmechanik zu der meinen, Annalen der Physik 79 (1926): 734-56.
33. Suárez, M. (1999). Theories, Models and Representations. In: L. Magnani, N.J. Nersessian and P. Thagard (eds.), Model-Based Reasoning in Scientific Discovery. New York: Plenum.
34. Suppe, F. (1977). The Search for Philosophic Understanding of Scientific Theories. In: F. Suppe (ed.), The Structure of Scientific Theories, pp. 1-241. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
35. Suppe, F. (1989). The Semantic Conception of Theories and Scientific Realism. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
36. Suppes, P. (1960). A Comparison of the Meaning and Uses of Models in Mathematics and the Empirical Sciences. Synthese 12: 287-301.
37. Suppes, P. (1967). Set-Theoretical Structures in Science. Mimeographed. Institute for Mathematical Studies in the Social Sciences. Stanford University, Stanford, California.
38. Suppes, P. (1969). Models of Data. In: Studies in Methodology and Foundations of Science, pp. 24-35. Dordrecht: Reidel.
39. Russell, B. (1927). The Analysis of Matter. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
40. van Fraassen, B. C. (1980). The Scientific Image. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
41. van Fraassen, B. C. (1989). Laws and Symmetry. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
42. van Fraassen, B. C. (1995/1996). A Philosophical Approach to the Foundations of Science. Foundations of Science 1: 5-18.
43. van Fraassen, B. C. (1997). Structure and Perspective: Philosophical Perplexity and Paradox. In: M.L. Dalla Chiara, K. Doets, D. Mundici, and J. van Benthem (eds.), Logic and Scientific Methods, pp. 511-530. Dordrecht:Kluwer.
44. van Fraassen, B. C. and J. Sigman (1993). Interpretation in Science and the Arts. In: G. Levine (ed.), Realism and Representation: Essays on the Problem of Realism in Relation to Science, Literature and Culture, pp. 73-99. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.