The Epistemic Division of Labor Revisited.
Some scientists are happy to follow in the footsteps of others; some like to explore novel approaches. It is tempting to think that herein lies an epistemic division of labor conducive to overall scientific progress: the latter point the way to fruitful areas of research, and the former more fully e...
| Published in: | Philosophy of Science Vol. 82; no. 3; pp. 454 - 473 |
|---|---|
| Main Author: | |
| Format: | Article |
| Published: |
Cambridge University Press
Jul2015
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | View this record in EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=103017592&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: hlh uiTerm: 103017592 longDbName: Humanities International Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: jinfo: jid: 00318248 PSC jtl: Philosophy of Science issn: 00318248 maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: Jul2015 vid: 82 iid: 3 pid: 15979 pub: Cambridge University Press artinfo: ui: 103017592 10.1086/681768 ppf: 454 ppct: 19 formats: fmt: – @attributes: type: T – @attributes: type: P size: 1.4MB tig: atl: The Epistemic Division of Labor Revisited. aug: au: Thoma, Johanna su: Epistemics Division of labor Scientists Science Research sug: subj: Epistemics Division of labor Scientists Science Research ab: Some scientists are happy to follow in the footsteps of others; some like to explore novel approaches. It is tempting to think that herein lies an epistemic division of labor conducive to overall scientific progress: the latter point the way to fruitful areas of research, and the former more fully explore those areas. Weisberg and Muldoon's model, however, suggests that it would be best if all scientists explored novel approaches. I argue that this is due to implausible modeling choices, and I present an alternative 'epistemic landscape' model that demonstrates the alleged benefits from division of labor, with one restriction. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Article src: R language: English refInfo: copyright: @attributes: flag: Y custom: Copyright of Philosophy of Science is the property of Cambridge University Press and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. item: Philosophy of Science holder: Cambridge University Press dt: @attributes: year: 2015 holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|