Small Talk: Nanotechnology and Metaphor

The general topic I am addressing concerns the epistemological role of the use of metaphor in the philosophy of science. More specifically, I am concerned with the role metaphor plays in scientific and technological change. In the case in point, nanotechnology, I will explore the role of metaphor in changing our conception of the confirmation of the plausibility of theoretical notions. The basic idea is that metaphors either offer or suggest images that are meant to persuade one to change one’s belief. Thus the confirmatory role is variable..

In the Western tradition, drawing attention to the linguistic significance of analogy and metaphor can be traced back to the writings of the early Greek philosophers Plato and Aristotle. More recently, philosophers of science have drawn attention to the role of analogy and metaphor in the development of scientific theory. Also, linguists and psychologists now suggest that, in addition to being distinctive uses of language with various rhetorical functions, metaphors constitute fundamental processes of thought with basic epistemological functions. Drawing on numerous sources from outside the nursing literature, this paper seeks to show the implications of current theory relating to analogy and metaphor for nursing and educational practice. It also seeks to demonstrate, using a practical example, how this theory can be applied to the teaching of qualitative research. Using reflection on our experiences of using analogy and metaphor in teaching the qualitative research process on a Master's degree programme, we assess the potential for using analogy and metaphor as a teaching strategy. This experience is also used to explore and discuss the wider implications of the use of analogy and metaphor in health and educational practices. While analogies and metaphors can help students make creative and imaginative links between existing conceptual frameworks and those associated with new knowledge, thereby facilitating its assimilation, the use of analogy and metaphor remains an under-researched area of nursing and educational practice. The cultural specificity of a metaphor does not necessarily prevent its usefulness cross culturally. The use of metaphor and analogy can also facilitate the injection of humour to a subject students frequently find 'dry' and intimidating. Analogies and metaphors are potentially powerful teaching and learning strategies. However, much is still not known about how they work at the cognitive level. Consequently, there is considerable scope for further research in this area in nurse education and clinical practice.

Philosophy of science studies the methods, theories, and concepts used by scientists. It mainly developed as a field in its own right during the twentieth century and is now a diversified and lively research area. This book surveys the current state of the discipline by focusing on central themes such as confirmation of scientific hypotheses, scientific explanation, causality, the relationship between science and metaphysics, scientific change, the relationship between philosophy of science and science studies, the role of theories and models, and unity of science. These themes define general philosophy of science. The book also presents subdisciplines in the philosophy of science dealing with the main sciences: logic, mathematics, physics, biology, medicine, cognitive science, linguistics, social sciences, and economics. Although it is common to address the specific philosophical problems raised by physics and biology in such a book, the place assigned to the philosophy of special sciences is much more unusual. Most authors collaborate on a regular basis in their research or teaching and share a common vision of philosophy of science and its place within philosophy and academia in general. The chapters have been written in close accordance with the three editors, thus achieving strong unity of style and tone.

Previous article FreeNotes on ContributorsCorrections to this articleErrataPDFPDF PLUSFull Text Add to favoritesDownload CitationTrack CitationsPermissionsReprints Share onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditEmailQR Code SectionsMoreTina Adcock received her Ph.D. from the Scott Polar Research Institute at the University of Cambridge and is now a postdoctoral fellow at the Rutgers Center for Historical Analysis. She specializes in the history of science, exploration, and travel in the modern North American Arctic.Gerardo Aldana is Professor of Anthropology and [email protected] at the University of California, Santa Barbara. His interests broadly consider the sciences of ancient Mesoamerica but focus on the astronomy recorded in Mayan hieroglyphic texts. He is working on the historical contextualization of scientific discovery within the Dresden Codex Venus Table.Gerardo Aldana is Professor of Anthropology and [email protected] at UCSB. His interests broadly consider the sciences of ancient Mesoamerica, but focus on the astronomy recorded in Mayan hieroglyphic texts. He is currently working on the historical contextualization of scientific discovery within the Dresden Codex Venus Table.Brian Balmer is Professor of Science Policy Studies in the Department of Science and Technology Studies, University College London. His research interests combine historical and sociological approaches and include the history of chemical and biological warfare, the history of the “brain drain,” and the role of volunteers in biomedical research.Trevor Barnes is Professor of Geography at the University of British Columbia. His research interests are in the history of twentieth-century geographical thought.Richard H. Beyler teaches history of science, intellectual history, and German history at Portland State University in Oregon. His research focuses on the political history of scientific institutions in twentieth-century Germany and on the history of biophysics before the rise of molecular biology.Karin Bijsterveld, a historian, is a professor in the Department of Technology and Society Studies at Maastricht University. She is the coeditor (with Trevor Pinch) of The Oxford Handbook of Sound Studies (Oxford, 2012) and the author of Mechanical Sound: Technology, Culture, and Public Problems of Noise in the Twentieth Century (MIT, 2008).Francesca Bordogna is Associate Professor in the Program of Liberal Studies at the University of Notre Dame, where she is also a fellow of the Reilly Center for the History and Philosophy of Science. She is the author of William James at the Boundaries (Chicago, 2008) and is now working on a book on pragmatism in early twentieth-century Italy.Anastasios Brenner is Professor of Philosophy at the Université Paul Valéry—Montpellier 3. His research focuses on the history of philosophy of science, mainly on the French tradition, as well as the current relevance of historical epistemology. His most recent book is Raison scientifique et valeurs humaines (Presses Universitaires de France, 2011).Sonja Brentjes is a researcher at the Max Planck Institute for the History of Science in Berlin, Germany. Her areas of research are the history of science, cartography, and institutions and cross-cultural exchange of knowledge in Islamicate societies and the Mediterranean world (8th–17th centuries).John Hedley Brooke is Professor Emeritus of Science and Religion at Oxford University. He has published extensively on history of chemistry, Victorian science, and the historical relations between science and religion. His latest book, edited with Ronald Numbers, is Science and Religion around the World (Oxford, 2011).Mark B. Brown is a professor in the Department of Government at California State University, Sacramento. He is the author of Science in Democracy: Expertise, Institutions, and Representation (MIT Press, 2009), as well as various publications on the politics of expertise, citizen participation, bioethics, climate change, and related topics.Stephen T. Casper ([email protected]) is Assistant Professor in Humanities and Social Sciences at Clarkson University. His research focuses on the history of neurology, neuroscience, and physiology, topics on which he has published two books as well as several articles, essays, and reviews.Pratik Chakrabarti, Reader in History at the University of Kent, has published widely on history of science, medicine, and imperialism. His works include Materials and Medicine: Trade, Conquest, and Therapeutics in the Eighteenth Century and Bacteriology in British India: Laboratory Medicine and the Tropics. He is an editor of Social History of Medicine.Cristina Chimisso (http://www.open.ac.uk/Arts/philosophy/chimisso.shtml) is Senior Lecturer in European Studies and Philosophy at the Open University, United Kingdom. She is the author of Writing the History of the Mind: Philosophy and Science in France, 1900 to 1960s (Ashgate, 2008), and Gaston Bachelard: Critic of Science and the Imagination (Routledge, 2001).Deborah R. Coen is an associate professor of history at Barnard College, Columbia University, and the author, most recently, of The Earthquake Observers: Disaster Science from Lisbon to Richter (University of Chicago Press, 2013).Claudine Cohen, a philosopher and historian of earth and life sciences, holds professorships in science at the EPHE (Life and Earth Science Section) and in the humanities at the EHESS (Center for Language and Arts) in Paris. Her publications include Science, libertinage et clandestinité à l'aube des Lumières: Le transformisme de Telliamed (Presses Universitaires de France, 2011), La méthode de Zadig: La trace, le fossile, la preuve (Seuil, 2011), The Fate of the Mammoth: Fossils, Myths, and History (Chicago, 2002), and the first translation of Leibniz's Protogaea (with André Wakefield [Chicago, 2008]). In 2012 she was awarded the Eugen Wegmann Prize of the French Geological Society for her work in the history of geosciences.Roger Cooter is Honorary Professor in the Department of History at University College London. His latest book, Writing History in the Age of Biomedicine (Yale, 2013), was written with Claudia Stein. With her he is now working on a study of capitalism, biopolitics, and hygiene in Germany and Britain from the late nineteenth century.Andrew Ede is a historian of science specializing in history of chemistry. He is the Director of the Science, Technology, and Society Program and also teaches in the Department of History and Classics at the University of Alberta in Edmonton.Michael Egan (McMaster University) is the author of Barry Commoner and the Science of Survival: The Remaking of American Environmentalism (MIT Press, 2007). He is especially interested in the toxic century and is now at work on a global history of mercury pollution since World War II.Roger Emerson is Emeritus Professor of History at the University of Western Ontario, where he taught from 1964 to 1999. He is known for studies of the Scottish Enlightenment. His latest book, published in 2013, is a biography of an amateur scientist, improver, and politician: Archibald Campbell, third Duke of Argyll (1682–1761).Sterling Evans holds the Louise Welsh Chair in Southern Plains and Borderlands History at the University of Oklahoma. His research interests include environmental history, agricultural history, and borderlands history of North America and Latin America. He is the author of The Green Republic (1999) and Bound in Twine (2007).Paul Lawrence Farber is Oregon State University Distinguished Professor Emeritus. He does research on the history of natural history, racism, and evolution. His most recent book is Mixing Races: From Scientific Racism to Modern Evolutionary Ideas (2011).Steve Fuller holds the Auguste Comte Chair in Social Epistemology at the University of Warwick. He has authored more than twenty books, with two appearing in 2014: The Proactionary Imperative: A Foundation for Transhumanism (with Veronika Lipinska) and Knowledge: The Philosophical Quest in History.Alan Gabbey is Professor Emeritus of Philosophy, Barnard College, Columbia University. He is completing a book on Spinoza (Oxford University Press) and working on a book on mechanical philosophy in the early modern period.Cathy Gere is Associate Professor of History of Science at the University of California, San Diego. She is now working on a book about utilitarianism and the sciences of pain and pleasure.Pamela Gossin, Professor of History of Science and Literary Studies and the Director of Medical and Scientific Humanities at the University of Texas at Dallas, is writing two essays on nineteenth-century British literature and astronomy and creating a digital archive of the correspondence and scientific and literary essays of John G. Neihardt.Jean-Baptiste Gouyon is a science and technology scholar with a deep interest in the history of science in its public contexts. His research focuses on film, television, and museums as popular scientific media. He holds a Ph.D. in sociology from the University of York.Rich Hamerla is Associate Dean of the Honors College and Professor of the History of Science at the University of Oklahoma. In addition to his work in the history of chemistry, he teaches classes on Weapons of Mass Destruction and science and the Cold War and has publications addressing biological weapons.Darin Hayton is Associate Professor of the History of Science at Haverford College.John Henry is Professor of the History of Science at the University of Edinburgh. He recently published a collection of earlier research, Religion, Magic, and the Origins of Science in Early Modern England (Ashgate, 2012), and an introductory textbook, A Short History of Scientific Thought (Palgrave Macmillan, 2012).Noah Heringman is Professor of English at the University of Missouri. His publications include Romantic Rocks, Aesthetic Geology (2004) and Sciences of Antiquity: Romantic Antiquarianism, Natural History, and Knowledge Work (2013).Hunter Heyck is Associate Professor of the History of Science at the University of Oklahoma, where—much to his surprise—he has recently become department chair. His second book, The Age of System: The Rise and Fracture of High Modern Social Science, has just been accepted for publication by Johns Hopkins University Press.Jan P. Hogendijk is a professor of the history of mathematics in the Department of Mathematics at the University of Utrecht. His research interests are the history of the mathematical sciences in ancient Greek and medieval Islamic civilizations and the history of mathematics in the Netherlands between 1600 and 1850.Thierry Hoquet is Professor of Philosophy of Science in the Philosophy Faculty, University of Lyon 3, and a Junior Member of the Institut Universitaire de France. He specializes in the history of the life sciences, from Buffon to Darwin. He is currently completing a study on the way sex is variously defined by biologists.David A. Hounshell is Roderick Professor of Technology and Social Change at Carnegie Mellon University. He is the author of From the American System to Mass Production, 1800–1932 (1984), and “Planning and Executing ‘Automation’ at Ford Motor Company, 1945–1965: The Cleveland Engine Plant and Its Consequences,” in Fordism Transformed: The Development of Production Methods in the Automobile Industry, edited by Haruhito Shiomi and Kazuo Wada (Oxford, 1995).James Hull is an associate professor of history at the University of British Columbia (Kelowna) and an affiliate of the Institute for the History and Philosophy of Science and Technology (Toronto). He is Editor of Scientia Canadensis, the journal of the Canadian Science and Technology Historical Association.Georgia Irby is Associate Professor of Classical Studies at the College of William and Mary. Her research interests include the history of Greek and Roman science and the representation of science, broadly defined, in nonscientific Greco-Roman literature.Douglas M. Jesseph is Professor of Philosophy at the University of South Florida. He is the author of Berkeley's Philosophy of Mathematics, Squaring the Circle: The War between Hobbes and Wallis, and numerous articles on mathematics, methodology, and philosophy in the early modern period.Andrew Jewett is Associate Professor of History and of Social Studies at Harvard University and the author of Science, Democracy, and the American University: From the Civil War to the Cold War (Cambridge, 2012). He is currently a fellow at the National Humanities Center.Ann Johnson is an Associate Professor of History at the University of South Carolina. She works on the history of the physical sciences, engineering, technology, and modern Europe. Her most recent book was: Hitting the Brakes: Engineering Design and the Production of Knowledge (Duke, 2009)Paul Josephson teaches history at Colby College in Waterville, Maine, and is the author of the forthcoming Building a Soviet Arctic.Horst Kant studied physics, history, and philosophy of science. Since 1995 he has been a research scholar at the Max Planck Institute for the History of Science. His main subjects are history of physics in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries (especially institutional, social, and biographical aspects) and history of atomic physics.Peter P. Kirschenmann is Professor Emeritus in the Philosophy of the Natural Sciences and Philosophical Ethics at Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam. He has worked on a great variety of philosophical topics; a selection of his published articles can be found in his Science, Nature, and Ethics: Critical Philosophical Studies (Delft: Eburon, 2001).W. R. Laird is Associate Professor of History at Carleton University, Ottawa, where he teaches medieval history and the history of science. He is the author of The Unfinished Mechanics of Giuseppe Moletti (Toronto, 2000) and coeditor (with Sophie Roux) of Mechanics and Natural Philosophy before the Scientific Revolution (Dordrecht, 2008).Christoph Lüthy directs the Center for the History of Philosophy and Science at Radboud University, Nijmegen. He is particularly interested in the history of natural philosophy and of scientific iconography. In 2012 he published David Gorlaeus (1591–1612): An Enigmatic Figure in the History of Philosophy and Science (Amsterdam University Press).Robert MacDougall is Associate Professor of History at the University of Western Ontario and the author of The People's Network: The Political Economy of the Telephone in the Gilded Age.Lisa Messeri is a postdoctoral fellow at the University of Pennsylvania. She holds a Ph.D. from MIT's Program in History, Anthropology, and Science, Technology, and Society. She is completing a manuscript entitled Placing Outer Space: An Earthly Ethnography of Other Worlds.Robert G. Morrison is Associate Professor of Religion at Bowdoin College. He is the author of Islam and Science: The Intellectual Career of Ni˙zām al-Dīn al-Nīsābūrī (Routledge, 2007).Stephanie Moser is Professor of Archaeology at the University of Southampton. She has published widely on the visual representation of archaeology and the portrayal and reception of the ancient world.Adriana Novoa is a cultural historian whose specialty is science in Latin America. She and Alex Levine have coauthored two books about Darwinism in Argentina (From Man to Monkey and Darwinistas!). Her articles have been published in the Journal of Latin American Studies in Context, the Latinoamericanist, Revista Hispánica Moderna, and elsewhere.Benjamin B. Olshin is Associate Professor of Philosophy, History of Science and Technology, and Design at the University of the Arts in Philadelphia. His research areas include the history of cartography and exploration, ancient science and engineering, the philosophy of contemporary physics, and traditional modes of knowledge transmission.John Parascandola taught at the University of Wisconsin–Madison before serving as Chief of the History of Medicine Division of the National Library of Medicine and as Public Health Service Historian. He is the author of The Development of American Pharmacology: John J. Abel and the Shaping of a Discipline.Valentina Pugliano is a Wellcome Trust Research Fellow in the Department of History and Philosophy of Science at the University of Cambridge and a Junior Research Fellow at Christ's College, Cambridge. Her work focuses on early modern artisanal practices and the interaction between medicine and science in the Republic of Venice and the Ottoman Levant.Nicky Reeves is a postdoctoral researcher at the Department of History and Philosophy of Science, University of Cambridge, where he is a member of the Arts and Humanities Research Council–funded project “The Board of Longitude, 1714–1828: Science, Innovation, and Empire in the Georgian World,” conducted in association with the National Maritime Museum, Greenwich.Raul Rojas is a professor of computer science in Berlin. He is the founder of the Konrad Zuse Internet Archive, the largest online source of documents and blueprints written or drafted by Konrad Zuse. He is the author of Die Rechenmaschinen von Konrad Zuse (Springer-Verlag, 1998).Nicolaas Rupke is Johnson Professor in the College at Washington and Lee University, having recently retired from the Chair of the History of Science at Göttingen. Among his books are Richard Owen: Biology without Darwin (Chicago, 2009) and Alexander von Humboldt: A Metabiography (Chicago, 2008). He is now working on the non-Darwinian tradition in evolutionary biology.Dr Juanita Feros Ruys is the Director of the University of Sydney Node of the ARC Centre of Excellence for the History of Emotions and is currently investigating Scholastic approaches to demonology. Her study of the late poetic works of Peter Abelard will be published by Palgrave in 2014.Tilman Sauer teaches history of science at the University of Bern and is a Senior Editor with the Einstein Papers Project at the California Institute of Technology, Pasadena.John Scarborough is Professor in the School of Pharmacy and the Departments of History and Classics (quondam) at the University of Wisconsin–Madison. His books include Roman Medicine (1969; 1976) and Pharmacy and Drug Lore in Antiquity: Greece, Rome, Byzantium (2010). He is coeditor (with Paul T. Keyser) of the Oxford Handbook of Science and Medicine in the Classical World (forthcoming).Andrew Scull is Distinguished Professor of Sociology and Science Studies at the University of California, San Diego. His recent books include Madness: A Very Short Introduction, Hysteria: The Disturbing History, and Durkheim and the Law (2nd ed.), with Steven Lukes.J.B. Shank is a graduate of Stanford University with a Ph.D. in European History and Humanities. He is currently completing a book entitled Before Voltaire: Newton, “Newtonianism,” and the Beginning of the French Enlightenment which is under contract with the University of Chicago Press.Ruth Lewin Sime is Emeritus Professor of Chemistry at Sacramento City College. She is the author of Lise Meitner: A Life in Physics and is now writing a biographical study of Otto Hahn.Daniel Lord Smail is a professor of history at Harvard University, where he works on deep human history and the history and anthropology of Mediterranean societies between 1100 and 1600. His current research approaches transformations in the material culture of later medieval Mediterranean Europe using household inventories and inventories of debt recovery from Lucca and Marseille.Vassiliki Betty Smocovitis is Professor of History of Science at the University of Florida. She is the author of Unifying Biology: The Evolutionary Synthesis and Evolutionary Biology. Her interests include the history of twentieth-century evolutionary biology, genetics, and systematics, and she has published extensively in the history of the botanical sciences in North America.Rudolf Werner Soukup, of the Technische Universität Vienna, works on alchemy and early chemistry, chemical research in the Habsburg Monarchy, and Robert Bunsen's library in Althofen. He is the author of Alchemistisches Gold, Paracelsistische Pharmaka (1997), Die wissenschaftliche Welt von gestern (2004), Chemie in Österreich (2007), and Pioniere der Sexualhormonforschung (2010).David Spanagel is an assistant professor of history at Worcester Polytechnic Institute. His first book (Johns Hopkins University Press, forthcoming) is a study of the political, material, and cultural contexts of geological ideas in New York State during the early nineteenth century, centering on Amos Eaton.Max Stadler is Chair for Science Studies at ETH Zurich. Professor Stadler works on the history of perception, the nervous system, technology and design. He has published extensively on the history of neuroscience.Larry Stewart is Professor of History and Director of the “Situating Science” node at the University of Saskatchewan. He is the author of The Rise of Public Science (1992) and, with Margaret Jacob, Practical Matter (2004), as well as various essays on the dissemination of scientific knowledge since Newton. He is now writing a study of experiment during the Enlightenment and the first industrial revolution and is editing, with Erica Dyck, a collection of essays on the use of humans in experiments.Heiko Stoff is Guest Professor for the History of Science and Technology at the Technical University of Braunschweig. He is the author of Ewige Jugend: Konzepte der Verjüngung vom späten 19. Jahrhundert bis ins Dritte Reich (Böhlau, 2004) and Wirkstoffe: Eine Wissenschaftsgeschichte der Hormone, Vitamine und Enzyme, 1920–1970 (Stuttgart, 2012).Bruno J. Strasser is a professor at the University of Geneva and an adjunct professor at Yale University. He is the author of a book on the history of molecular biology in postwar Europe, La fabrique d'une nouvelle science: La biologie moléculaire à l'age aomique, 1945–1964 (Florence, 2006). He is now finishing a book on the history of biomedical collections and databases.Laurence Totelin is a Wellcome Trust Research Fellow in the Department of History and Philosophy of Science at the University of Cambridge. Her publications include Hippocratic Recipes: Oral and Written Transmission of Pharmacological Recipes in Fifth- and Fourth-Century Greece (Brill, 2009).Janet Vertesi is Assistant Professor of Sociology at Princeton University. Her recent research examines NASA's robotic space exploration missions; her book, Seeing Like a in on the is forthcoming from the University of Chicago in is a Fellow at the University of Her publications include the book University Press, and several research on the to the of Her current project with the history of is a professor in the Department of History at the University of California, San Diego. His research is on the cultural history of early modern science, the and of His most recent book is The and is Professor of History and Philosophy at State College in New is Professor of Philosophy at the University of York and a of early modern and the reception of She is the author of at the Origins of (Oxford, and The World Previous article by of the History of Science Society by The History of Science Society. articles this

This article discusses some important relations between the history and philosophy of science and the education of future professional geoscientists and teachers. A brief survey is presented of the discussions about the relations between these fields over the past 50 years, with an emphasis on the pedagogical role of the history and philosophy of science. A recent geological example is considered to pull together the conclusions advanced by some classic papers in science and geoscience. These conclusions reinforce the relevance of historical and epistemological reflections in improving the development of the profession and renewing educational practices, pointing out the potential of interdisciplinary learning and new innovative teaching methods. The careful, well-selected and documented utilization of controversial historical cases can foster experimentation and the comprehension of diverse examples of important scientific changes, thus contributing to a better education in the geosciences.

In recent years, philosophers of science have been increasingly concerned with questions about scientific change, and, in connection with those concerns, to rest their claims more and more on an examination of cases in the history of science. During the 1960s and early 1970s, those concerns tended to revolve around the question of whether scientific change, or at least major scientific change, is or is not “rational.” It seems to me, as I shall argue in what follows, that that question is misguided in principle, at least as it is usually understood, and that it calls attention away from the most important and potentially most fruitful problems about the nature of scientific change. Furthermore, I believe, and will argue below, that the most fundamental reasons for investigating scientific change, and the sense in which and degree to which it is necessary to base such investigation on an examination of the history of science (as well as of contemporary science) have not been adequately grasped even by many who are sympathetic to the approach. Finally, I do not believe that the difficulties in the way of such an approach have been properly appreciated and taken account of, and in many cases have not been considered at all. In particular, I will examine here five basic objections or types of objections against the view that the philosopher of science, in attempting to understand the nature of science, must examine the rationale of scientific development and innovation, and must base that examination on a study of cases from the history of science (as well as from contemporary science).

The problem of the theoretical reconstruction of the process of scientific paradigm change is by no means a new one in the philosophy and sociology of science. Nevertheless, one cannot say that its investigation has reached the point at which an overwhelming majority of specialists would agree at least about exactly how and in what directions it is necessary to move forward. Notwithstanding this circumstance, one can specify a certain set of basic questions that are recognized as such by the scholarly community of specialists in the field of the sociology and philosophy of science. This set includes such problems as the interaction of the empirical and the theoretical, of the rational and the irrational, of the individual and the social and, of course, the problem of the interaction of cognitive and social factors in the process of paradigm change. The last problem is a kind of focus, at which various approaches converge in order to engage in harsh criticism of one another. Despite the fact that everyone agreed long ago that the logico-empiricistic model of the development of scientific knowledge is inadequate and one-sided, the approaches proposed during the last ten to fifteen years-especially those belonging to the "strong program of the sociology of science"-are also subject to serious criticism. The observer cannot but form the impression that researchers, disillusioned with the extremes of the logicist approach, have turned to a no less one-sided and extreme sociocultural approach that leads to a boundless relativism that is extremely vulnerable in respect of methodology (when it is turned upon its own presuppositions). In particular, the latter approach relies on the well-known Kuhn-Feyerabend thesis concerning the incommensurability of successive paradigms, which presents in a provocatively irrational light the behavior of specialists in the mathematically most developed and rationally most elaborated fields of scientific knowledge.

The philosophy of technology constitutes a relatively recent area of reflection, compared to other topics of philosophical interest such as science or morals.This fact is not independent of the change in public sensitivities regarding technological change and anti-essentialist tendencies of contemporary philosophy.On the one hand, the traditional essentialist approach in philosophy of science and knowledge, typical of currents such as logical empiricism, conceived of technology as applied science and, more globally, practical activity as an application of general rules or principles.Recent historicist and naturalistic approaches in philosophy of science, and the development of ICT studies, have favoured a more realistic and contextualized view of science and its relations with technology, facilitating awareness of the great diversity of problems.specific philosophical posed by technology.Technology, on the other hand, has been categorized as a social problem in recent decades, becoming prominent in the media, public forums and political agendas.With the current intense technological development, the close dependence of the economy, institutions and ways of life on technological devices and processes, as well as the serious environmental repercussions or ethical and legal dilemmas caused by nuclear energy, has become especially evident.As a result of both factors, the interest in technology acquires in recent decades a remarkable impulse and ends up making it an object of study in more and more monographs, specialized magazines and international conferences.The academic conceptualization of technology, understood as applied science, only reflected a culturally generalized point of view during much of this century.

September 01 2015 Notes on Contributors Author and Article Information Online Issn: 1530-9274 Print Issn: 1063-6145 © 2015 by The Massachusetts Institute of Technology2015MIT Press Perspectives on Science (2015) 23 (3): 379–380. https://doi.org/10.1162/POSC_x_00178 Cite Icon Cite Permissions Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn MailTo Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Search Site Citation Notes on Contributors. Perspectives on Science 2015; 23 (3): 379–380. doi: https://doi.org/10.1162/POSC_x_00178 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentAll JournalsPerspectives on Science Search Advanced Search Lindsay R. Craig is an assistant professor of philosophy at Temple University. She specializes in philosophy of science and philosophy and history of evolutionary biology and evolutionary developmental biology. Her research focuses include scientific explanation, scientific change, and controversy dynamics. Previous publications can be found in Philosophy of Science and Biological Theory. Pierre-Olivier Méthot is Assistant Professor in the History and Philosophy of Science at Laval University (Québec, Canada). He is also a member of the Centre interruniversitaire de recherche sur la science et la technologie (CIRST-UQAM) and Book Review Editor for the journal History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences. Alfonso Arroyo-Santos teaches philosophy of science at UNAM, Mexico’s National University, and runs a private geoprospecting firm. He specializes in evolutionary biology and the interplay between theory and scientific practice. Mark E. Olson is an evolutionary biologist at UNAM, Mexico’s National University. He studies the evolution of... You do not currently have access to this content.

The use of metaphors and other tropes in science receives nowadays growing attention among the philosophers of science, mainly when related to theoretical models. In this paper I analyse basically issues like the cognitive value of scientific metaphors, the role played by analogy in the constructions of metaphors, and, mainly, the question of whether theoretical models are metaphors. Throughout the analysis of different current approaches to the relationships between metaphors and models in science, I claim that the analogy only plays a fundamental role in the metaphorical proposals in science after analogue theoretical models are at our disposal. This nonetheless does not preclude for the analogy to become sometimes a guide in scientific creativity.

There are a spate of books . . .that suggest that business is a "mystical experience [or] a "religious happening."And their mantra is lifted directly from the lips of Yoda-"experience the force."No matter how sincere and well intentioned some of these texts are-enough already, please! 1 Size matters not.Look at me.Judge me by my size, do you?Hm

This article gives an ephemeral overview of the most influential views on the nature and process of change in science. Theory change in science is one of the most important issues in philosophy of science. Scientific theories are subject to change beyond space and time. There are various factors that lead theories change such as discomfort among the theories. In this paper, discussing how the rationality of science was related with its methods and methodologies, I tried to show that it was after Kuhn’s work the Structure of Scientific Revolutions that the debate on theory choice becomes a central issue in philosophy of science. Following this the process in theory change in science can be deductive and inductive or rational and non-rational. According to the account of Kuhn’s scientific change there are four steps in the process of scientific change; the predominant one is normal science, anomalies, crisis and finally a new phase of normal science. Then I discussed some of the philosophers who criticize Kuhn’s work Structure of Scientific Revolutions, particularly popper’s criticism on Kuhn; in this regard I also forwarded Kuhn’s response for his critics. Finally I critically compared Kuhn’s and Popper’s ideas on the evolution of science.

Biological, evolutionary or ecological metaphors underpin much of theorisation in the social sciences in general, and the themes of inter-firm competition and technological change in particular. The argument advanced in this paper is that the use of ecological metaphors has been partial and selective. In key areas of theorisation such as industrial ecology the selective use of ecological metaphors has generated theoretical and empirical bias. In turn, this means that both our understanding of sustainability and our ability to create policy for the attainment of sustainability are, at best, partial. A different selection of ecological metaphors can result in different implications for our understanding of sustainable business and the limitations of such metaphors to the attainment of sustainability. To illustrate this view, this paper explores the latent possibilities in ecological concepts such as diversity, local adaptation, and alien species invasion as they might be applied to business and economic analysis.

The discussion of J. Sneed’s and W. Stegmuller’s logical reconstruction of Kuhn’s conception of sciences change leads inevitably to the formulation of more general questions such as: what form, from the modern point of view, should be characteristic of the theory of change of scientific theories? What role belongs to logic, logical formalization of the content (intuitive) sentences of this theory during construction of such a theory? Certainly, these questions are not new. They essentially touch upon the central problems of the philosophy of science, and each influential methodological conception provided its own answer. And the rational reconstruction of Kuhn’s views developed by Sneed and Stegmuller and, in particular, the discussion of these issues between Kuhn, Sneed and Stegmuller that took place in 1975 at the Fifth International Congress of Logic, Methodology, and Philosophy of Science shed new light on these topics which are fundamental for the philosophy and history of science. Thus it is appropriate to consider this continuing discussion.

A large segment of the modem public believes that technological change is discontinuous and depends on the heroic labors of individual geniuses, such as Eli Whitney, Thomas A. Edison, Henry Ford, and Wilbur and Orville Wright, who single-handedly invent the unique machines and devices that constitute modern technology. According to this view inventions are the products of superior persons who owe little or nothing to the past.