tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2264125276161269122.post1681644539132271113..comments2023-04-21T20:55:22.881-04:00Comments on It's Only A Theory: Hacking and Franklin on the Functional Complexity of EvidenceGabriele Contessahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13607158011908969169noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2264125276161269122.post-91031980634899533702010-10-01T12:32:33.187-04:002010-10-01T12:32:33.187-04:00Now I know how to go at this! I of course agree wi...Now I know how to go at this! I of course agree with Jonathan's intuitions, and I look forward to seeing your account of the trouble they cause. But you are so far making an <i>empirical</i> argument, right? Our concept of evidence, you are saying, "doesn't really capture the uses of evidence in scientific practice". Well, what's your evidence for that? That is, how do you study the "uses of evidence in scientific practice". In this case, your source is Goldstein and Goldstein, which, as you say, draws on Snow's own account, and which you grant is inadequate as evidence (at least in the narrow sense).<br /><br />You say, you are only illustrating the idea here. But where does your knowledge of practice come from? And how does it relate to the studies of "laboratory life" that have been and continue to be produced in STS?<br /><br />I get worried when my intuitions are challenged by empirical arguments, mainly because I know that "studies show" all kinds of contradictory things. It would surprise me if a comprehensive "philosophy" of evidence could capture all its "uses in practice". (Just a philosophy of hammers won't anticipate all the ways carpenters use them.)<br /><br />In fact, I'd much prefer to look at how evidence functions "in theory", i.e., in the written reporting of results and the drawing of implications for general laws. That's really where philosophy of science can show its merit. In relation to practice, we're going to get beaten to a pulp by ethnographers.Thomashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04858865501469168339noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2264125276161269122.post-33086286697390932932010-10-01T10:10:18.419-04:002010-10-01T10:10:18.419-04:00Eric and Heather - Thanks for the pointers!
Jon...Eric and Heather - Thanks for the pointers! <br /><br />Jonathan - I see why you might go that way. Part of my argument, which will come to the fore in my 2nd paper on the subject, is that the "intuitive" notion is the source of many problems. Another part that I try to make clear in the paper I posted the other day is that it also doesn't really capture the uses of evidence in scientific practice.Matthew J. Brownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00730262274655726070noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2264125276161269122.post-35046152698438544832010-10-01T09:24:46.410-04:002010-10-01T09:24:46.410-04:00J.S. Mill has a lovely discussion of observation v...J.S. Mill has a lovely discussion of observation vs. experimental evidence in Chap. VII Of Observation and Experiment in his System of Logic. Of course, you are arguing for more complexity than he presents there, but it might be a nice historical touchpoint for you.Heather Douglashttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14064081610707565161noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2264125276161269122.post-14258440911747564752010-10-01T02:46:58.954-04:002010-10-01T02:46:58.954-04:00Are we talking here about evidence or experiments?...Are we talking here about evidence or experiments?<br /><br />My gut reaction is to say that experiments have many functions, one of which is to provide evidence for or against hypotheses.<br /><br />It sounds as though you want to say instead that, while all experiments are sources of evidence, the evidence they provide has many functions.<br /><br />I don't know why exactly I prefer the first version - I just think it stays closer to the intuitive notion of "evidence" as something that is adduced in support of an assertion or belief.Jonathan Birchnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2264125276161269122.post-88723409056035222002010-10-01T00:02:27.466-04:002010-10-01T00:02:27.466-04:00Besides Allan Franklin, George Smith, bill harper,...Besides Allan Franklin, George Smith, bill harper, and Michel Jansen have also been exploring these themes in their work (often in hps mode, so in works on newton and Einstein).Eric Schliesserhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13840436384353801701noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2264125276161269122.post-7560969327098632642010-09-30T19:46:01.847-04:002010-09-30T19:46:01.847-04:00I have long thought of empirical investigation as ...I have long thought of empirical investigation as a continuum between passive (naive) observation and active (interventionist) observation. It seems to me that we have been so obsessed by theory-dependence that we overlook the relativity of theory to domains of investigation, and so we may investigate a domain without theory in both modes or some mixture of them.John S. Wilkinshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04417266986565803683noreply@blogger.com