{"id":3677,"date":"2013-11-29T13:05:48","date_gmt":"2013-11-29T12:05:48","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/arban.espais.iec.cat\/?p=3677"},"modified":"2013-12-16T14:42:35","modified_gmt":"2013-12-16T13:42:35","slug":"the-debate-over-the-marriage-of-history-and-philosophy-of-science-reading-group","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/arban.espais.iec.cat\/2013\/11\/29\/the-debate-over-the-marriage-of-history-and-philosophy-of-science-reading-group\/","title":{"rendered":"The Debate over the \u201cMarriage\u201d of History and Philosophy of Science Reading group"},"content":{"rendered":"

Reading group<\/strong><\/p>\n

UAB, Departament de Filosofia<\/strong><\/p>\n

Sala de reunions, B7\/113<\/strong><\/p>\n

Organisation: Thomas Sturm<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u00a0All welcome.\u00a0The readings can be ordered from Thomas Sturm (Thomas.Sturm AT uab.cat).<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Session 1 \u2013 Thursday, December 5, 2013, 11:30-1:30: The genetic\/naturalistic fallacy<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

Hanson, N. 1962. The irrelevance of history of science to philosophy of science. Journal of Philosophy, 59, 574-586.<\/p>\n

Giere, R. 1973. History and philosophy of science: Intimate relation or marriage of convenience? British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 24, 282\u2013297.<\/p>\n

NOTE: Giere refers to: Stuewer, R. H. (ed.) 1970. Historical and philosophical perspectives of science. New York: Gordon and Breach. – All papers are here: http:\/\/www.mcps.umn.edu\/philosophy\/completeVol5.html<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Session 2 \u2013 Friday, December 20, 2013, 11:30-1:30 (please bring Christmas cookies): Defending the necessity of the marriage 1<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

McMullin, E. 1976. History and philosophy of science \u2013 a marriage of convenience? In R.S. Cohen et al. (eds.), PSA 1974, Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science 32 (pp. 585-601). Dordrecht: Reidel.<\/p>\n

Kuhn, T. 1977. The relations between the history and the philosophy of science. In T. Kuhn, The essential tension (pp. 3\u201320). Chicago: Chicago UP.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Session 3 \u2013 Friday, January 17, 2014, 11:30-1:30: Defending the necessity of the marriage 2<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Burian, R. M. 1977. More than a marriage of convenience: On the inextricability of the history and philosophy of science. Philosophy of Science, 44, 1\u201342.<\/p>\n

Shapere, D. 1977. What can the theory of knowledge learn from the history of knowledge? The Monist, 60, 488-508.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Session 4 \u2013 February 28, 2014, 11:30-1:30: A marriage of reason<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Kr\u00fcger, L. 1978. Does a science need knowledge of its history? In: Kr\u00fcger, L. (2005), Why does history matter to philosophy and the sciences? Ed. by T. Sturm, W. Carl & L. Daston. Berlin: De Gruyter, Ch. V.1.<\/p>\n

Kr\u00fcger, L. 1982. History and philosophy of science – a marriage for the sake of reason.\u00a0 In L. J. Cohen, J. \u0141o\u015b, H. Pfeiffer & K.-P. Podewski (Eds.), Proceedings of the VI. International Congress for logic, methodology and philosophy of science, Hannover 1979 (pp. 108\u2013112). Amsterdam: North-Holland.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Session 5 \u2013 Friday, March 14, 2014, 11:30-1:30: The role of history of philosophy<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Kr\u00fcger, L. 1986: Why do we study the history of philosophy? Kr\u00fcger, L. (2005), Why does history matter to philosophy and the sciences? Ed. by T. Sturm, W. Carl & L. Daston. Berlin: De Gruyter, Ch. V.2.<\/p>\n

Friedman, M. 1993. Remarks on the history of science and the history of philosophy. In P. Horwich (ed.), World changes: Thomas Kuhn and the nature of science (pp. 36-54). Cambridge\/MA & London: MIT Press.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Session 6 \u2013 Friday, April 11, 2014, 11:30-1:30: The dilemma of case studies<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Pitt, J. 2001.The dilemma of case studies: Toward a heraclitian philosophy of science. Perspectives on Science, 9, 333-382.<\/p>\n

Burian, R. 2001. The dilemma of case studies resolved: The virtues of using case studies in the history and philosophy of science. Perspectives on Science, 9, 383-404.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Session 7 \u2013 Friday, May 9, 2014, 11:30-1:30: New directions<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

Galison, P. 2008. Ten problems in history and philosophy of science. Isis, 99, 111-124.<\/p>\n

Schickore, J. 2011. More thoughts on HPS: Another 20 years later. Perspectives on Science, 19, 453-481.<\/p>\n

Arabatzis, T. & J. Schickore, 2012. Introduction: Ways of integrating history and philosophy of science. Perspectives on Science 20:4, 395-408.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Session 8 \u2013 Friday, June 6, 2014, 11:30-1:30: New directions<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

Kitcher, P. 2011. Epistemology without history is blind. Erkenntnis, 75, 505-524.<\/p>\n

Giere, R. 2011. History and philosophy of science: Thirty-five years later. In Schmaltz, T. & S. Mauskopf (eds.), Integrating history and philosophy of science: Problems and prospects (pp. 59-66). Dordrecht: Springer.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

HPS: A marriage? (Incomplete bibliography)<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n

Achinstein, P. 1974. History and philosophy of science: A reply to Cohen. In Suppe, F. (ed.), The Structure of Scientific Theories (pp. 350-360). Urbana: University of Illinois Press<\/p>\n

Arabatzis, T. & V. Kindi. 2008. The problem of conceptual change in the philosophy and history of science. In S. Vosniadou (ed.), International handbook of research on conceptual change (pp. 345-373). London: Routledge.<\/p>\n

Arabatzis, T. & J. Schickore, 2012. Introduction: Ways of integrating history and philosophy of science. Perspectives on Science 20:4, 395-408.<\/p>\n

Burian, R. M. 1977. More than a marriage of convenience: On the inextricability of the history and philosophy of science. Philosophy of Science, 44, 1\u201342.<\/p>\n

Burian, R. 2001. The dilemma of case studies resolved: The virtues of using case studies in the history and philosophy of science. Perspectives on Science, 9, 383-404.<\/p>\n

Burian, R. M. 2002. Comments on the precarious relation between history of science and philosophy of science. Perspectives on Science, 10, 398-407.<\/p>\n

Chang, H. 2011. Beyond case-studies: History as philosophy. In: S. Mauskopf and T. Schmaltz (eds.), Integrating History and Philosophy of Science: Problems and Prospects (pp. 109-124). Dordrecht: Springer.<\/p>\n

Domsky, M. & Dickson, M. (Eds.) (2010). Discourse on a new method: Reinvigorating the marriage of history and philosophy of science. (La Salle: Open Court)<\/p>\n

Feigl, H. 1970. Beyond peaceful coexistence. In R. H. Stuewer (ed.), Historical and Philosophical Perspectives of Science, Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, Vol. 5 (University of Minnesota Press), pp. 3-11.<\/p>\n

Friedman, M. 1993. Remarks on the history of science and the history of philosophy. In P. Horwich (Ed.), World changes: Thomas Kuhn and the nature of science (pp. 36-54). Cambridge\/MA & London: MIT Press.<\/p>\n

Friedman, M. 2008. HPS in a new key. Isis, 99, 125-134.<\/p>\n

Galison, P. 2008. Ten problems in history and philosophy of science. Isis, 99, 111-124.<\/p>\n

Giere, R. 1973. History and philosophy of science: Intimate relation or marriage of convenience? British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 24, 282\u2013297.<\/p>\n

Giere, R. 2011. History and philosophy of science: Thirty-five years later. In Schmaltz, T. & S. Mauskopf (eds.), Integrating history and philosophy of science: Problems and prospects. Dordrecht: Springer.<\/p>\n

Golinski, J. 2011. Thomas Kuhn and interdisciplinary conversation: Why historians and philosophers of science stopped talking to one another. In S. Mauskopf and T. Schmaltz (eds.), Integrating History and Philosophy of Science: Problems and Prospects (Springer), pp. 13-28.<\/p>\n

Hanson, N. R. 1962. The irrelevance of history of science to philosophy of science. The Journal of Philosophy 59:21, 574-586.<\/p>\n

Hatfield, G. (1996). The importance of the history of science for philosophy in general. Synthese, 106, 113-138.<\/p>\n

Hoyningen-Huene, P. (1993). Reconstructing scientific revolutions: Thomas S. Kuhn\u2019s philosophy of science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.<\/p>\n

Kitcher, P. 2011. Epistemology without history is blind. Erkenntnis, 75, 505-524.<\/p>\n

Kuhn, T.S. (1962\/2nd, rev. ed. 1970). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.<\/p>\n

Kuhn, T. S. 1977. The relations between the history and the philosophy of science. In Kuhn, The Essential Tension (University of Chicago Press), pp. 3-20.<\/p>\n

Kuhn, T. S. 1980. The halt and the blind: Philosophy and history of science. The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 31:2, 181-192.<\/p>\n

Kr\u00fcger, L. 1982. History and philosophy of science – a marriage for the sake of reason.\u00a0 In L. J. Cohen, J. \u0141o\u015b, H. Pfeiffer & K.-P. Podewski (Eds.), Proceedings of the VI. International Congress for logic, methodology and philosophy of science, Hannover 1979 (pp. 108\u2013112). Amsterdam: North-Holland.<\/p>\n

Kr\u00fcger, L. 2005. Why does history matter to philosophy and the sciences? Ed. by T. Sturm, W. Carl & L. Daston. Berlin: De Gruyter.<\/p>\n

Lakatos, I. & Musgrave, A. (eds.) 1970. Criticism and the growth of knowledge. London: Cambridge University Press.<\/p>\n

Lakatos, I. 1974. History of science and its rational reconstructions. In Elkana, Y. (ed.), The interaction between science and philosophy (pp. 195-241). Atlantic Highlands, NY: Humanities Press.<\/p>\n

Laudan, L. 1989. Thoughts on HPS: 20 years later. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 20, 9-13.<\/p>\n

Laudan, L., A. Donovan, et al. 1986. Scientific change: Philosophical models and historical research. Synthese, 69, 141-223.<\/p>\n

McMullin, E. 1970. The history and philosophy of science: A taxonomy. In R. H. Stuewer (ed.), Historical and Philosophical Perspectives of Science, Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, Vol. 5 (University of Minnesota Press), pp. 12-67.<\/p>\n

McMullin, E. 1976. History and philosophy of science \u2013 a marriage of convenience? In R.S. Cohen et al. (Eds.), PSA 1974, Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science 32 (pp. 585-601). Dordrecht: Reidel.<\/p>\n

Pitt, J. 2001.The dilemma of case studies: Toward a heraclitian philosophy of science. Perspectives on Science, 9, 333-382.<\/p>\n

Ruse, M. 1993. Do the history of science and the philosophy of science have anything to say to each other? PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1992, 467.<\/p>\n

Schickore, J. 2011. More thoughts on HPS: Another 20 years later. Perspectives on Science, 19:4, 453-481.<\/p>\n

Schindler, S. 2013. The Kuhnian mode of HPS. Synthese.<\/p>\n

Shapere, D. 1977. What can the theory of knowledge learn from the history of knowledge? The Monist, 60, 488-508.<\/p>\n

Steinle, F. & R. Burian 2002. Special issue: History of science and philosophy of science. Perspectives on Science 10.<\/p>\n

Steinle, F. & R. Burian. 2002. Introduction: History of science and philosophy of science. Perspectives on Science 10:4, 391-397.<\/p>\n

Stuewer, R. H. (ed.) 1970. Historical and philosophical perspectives of science. New York: Gordon and Breach.<\/p>\n

Wartofsky, M. 1979. The relation between philosophy of science and history of science (written 1977). In M. Wartofsky, Models: Representation and the scientific understanding (pp. 119-139). Dordrecht: D. Reidel.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Reading group UAB, Departament de Filosofia Sala de reunions, B7\/113 Organisation: Thomas Sturm \u00a0All welcome.\u00a0The readings can be ordered from Thomas Sturm (Thomas.Sturm AT uab.cat).   Session 1 \u2013 Thursday, December 5, 2013, 11:30-1:30: The genetic\/naturalistic fallacy Hanson, N. 1962. The irrelevance of history of science to philosophy of science. Journal of Philosophy, 59, 574-586. […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":34,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_mi_skip_tracking":false},"categories":[8,1,12],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/arban.espais.iec.cat\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3677"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/arban.espais.iec.cat\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/arban.espais.iec.cat\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/arban.espais.iec.cat\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/34"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/arban.espais.iec.cat\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=3677"}],"version-history":[{"count":9,"href":"https:\/\/arban.espais.iec.cat\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3677\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":3718,"href":"https:\/\/arban.espais.iec.cat\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/3677\/revisions\/3718"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/arban.espais.iec.cat\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=3677"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/arban.espais.iec.cat\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=3677"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/arban.espais.iec.cat\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=3677"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}