Robert Meunier (University of Kassel)
When philosophers of science turned their attention to practices, many aspects of science came in focus that had been neglected in earlier accounts, which were mainly interested in theories and their justification. The role of instruments and experiments, of various forms of modelling, or of images and diagrams in discovery, reasoning and concept formation have been discussed since then, providing rich and empirically based accounts of how scientific knowledge comes about and changes. These accounts have shifted the questions, broadened the field and brought to the fore many specificities of different areas of science. Yet, it seems worthwhile from a philosophical (probably as opposed to a historical or sociological) perspective to aim for a more general account of the nature of scientific practice and its capacity to result in new knowledge. Such a program would not aim at reestablishing the unity of science by reformulating on the level of practice the Scientific Method (in singular and with capitals), which was previously mainly addressed as a pattern of reasoning (where debates concerned which was the right one). Instead, the idea would be to spell out the relevant kinds and features of scientific activities, and the criteria for their individuation and the appropriate level of detail of their description regarding different epistemological questions. The result could be a unified analytical apparatus that can be used to map and explain the disunity found in the sciences.
The proposed poster is meant to introduce a grant project that is set up to work toward such a program in philosophy of science. The project can build on the literature on various aspects of scientific practice to draw general lessons from it, as well as on previous philosophical accounts of the significance of activities as units of analysis in studying scientific practice (e.g., by Hasok Chang). To get a grip on the problem, the project starts from distinguishing three levels of analysis: First, the knowledge that goes into planning and initiating scientific activity, or “project knowledge” (to avoid the notion that science is an entirely preconceived activity, it should be emphasized that this involves knowledge that enables researchers to evaluate and seize opportunities in the face of unprecedented events). Second, the research activities themselves, which involve the work with the materials of interest or a model system that is taken to represent them, including the data recording techniques, as well as activities that result in the necessary material and social structures. Third, the representations of results, which includes the representation of the research activities and the material constellations they give rise to, as well as the resulting observational or experimental data and their conceptual interpretation.
The design of the poster will represent these three levels and their interrelation, and indicate the necessary distinctions that should be made on each level to account for the fact that different forms of activities, guided by different project knowledge and resulting in different representations, gives rise to different forms of knowledge in various areas.
