Style, but Substance: An Epistemology of Visual versus Numerical Representation in Scientific Practice.

In practice, scientists must convey data in a "representational style" (e.g., as a numerical array or visual representation). Various authors seek to explain the epistemic role of scientific visual representation in terms of formal conventions (e.g., Goodman, Perini, and Kulvicki). Goodman also tend...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:Philosophy of Science Vol. 78; no. 5; pp. 774 - 788
Main Author: Irving, Zachary C.
Format: Article
Published: Cambridge University Press Dec2011
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=70256743&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: hlh
    uiTerm: 70256743
    longDbName: Humanities International Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        00318248
        PSC
      jtl: Philosophy of Science
      issn: 00318248
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: Dec2011
      vid: 78
      iid: 5
      pid: 15979
      pub: Cambridge University Press
    artinfo:
      ui:
        70256743
        10.1086/662567
      ppf: 774
      ppct: 14
      formats:
        fmt:
          @attributes:
            type: P
            size: 2.9MB
      tig:
        atl: Style, but Substance: An Epistemology of Visual versus Numerical Representation in Scientific Practice.
      aug:
        au: Irving, Zachary C.
      su:
        Representation (Philosophy)
        Theory of knowledge
        Scientific method
        Visualization
        Mathematical models
        Philosophy of science
      sug:
        subj:
          Representation (Philosophy)
          Theory of knowledge
          Scientific method
          Visualization
          Mathematical models
          Philosophy of science
      ab: In practice, scientists must convey data in a "representational style" (e.g., as a numerical array or visual representation). Various authors seek to explain the epistemic role of scientific visual representation in terms of formal conventions (e.g., Goodman, Perini, and Kulvicki). Goodman also tends to dismiss the epistemic relevance of human cognition. My position is that visual conventions are nonarbitrary, in that they play to scientists' cognitive abilities and limitations. My account draws on Perini's formal analysis, scientific case studies, and empirical literature on global pattern detection in neurotypicals, autistics, and dyslexics.
      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: 2011
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N