The Value of Surprise in Science.

Scientific results are often presented as 'surprising' as if that is a good thing. Is it? And if so, why? What is the value of surprise in science? Discussions of surprise in science have been limited, but surprise has been used as a way of defending the epistemic privilege of experiments over simul...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Erkenntnis Vol. 88; no. 4; pp. 1447 - 1467
Autores principales: French, Steven, Murphy, Alice
Formato: Artículo
Publicado: Springer Nature Apr2023
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=162584811&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: hlh
    uiTerm: 162584811
    longDbName: Humanities International Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        01650106
        5KZ
      jtl: Erkenntnis
      issn: 01650106
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: Apr2023
      vid: 88
      iid: 4
      pid: 237
      pub: Springer Nature
    artinfo:
      ui:
        162584811
        10.1007/s10670-021-00410-z
      ppf: 1447
      ppct: 20
      formats:
        fmt:
          – @attributes:
              type: T
          – @attributes:
              type: P
              size: 579KB
      tig:
        atl: The Value of Surprise in Science.
      aug:
        au:
          French, Steven
          Murphy, Alice
        affil:
          School of PRHS, University of Leeds, Woodhouse Lane, LS2 9JT, Leeds, UK
          Fakultät für Philosophie, Wissenschaftstheorie Und Religionswissenschaft, Lehrstuhl Für Wissenschaftstheorie, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Geschwister-Scholl-Platz 1, 80539, Munich, Germany
      su: Thought experiments
      sug:
        subj: Thought experiments
      ab: Scientific results are often presented as 'surprising' as if that is a good thing. Is it? And if so, why? What is the value of surprise in science? Discussions of surprise in science have been limited, but surprise has been used as a way of defending the epistemic privilege of experiments over simulations. The argument is that while experiments can 'confound', simulations can merely surprise (Morgan, 2005). Our aim in this paper is to show that the discussion of surprise can be usefully extended to thought experiments and theoretical derivations. We argue that in focusing on these features of scientific practice, we can see that the surprise-confoundment distinction does not fully capture surprise in science. We set out how thought experiments and theoretical derivations can bring about surprises that can be disruptive in a productive way, and we end by exploring how this links with their future fertility.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype: Article
      src: R
    language: English
    refInfo:
    copyright:
      @attributes:
        flag: Y
      custom: Erkenntnis is a copyright of Springer, 2023. All Rights Reserved.
      item: Erkenntnis
      holder: Springer Nature
      dt:
        @attributes:
          year: 2023
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N