PhilSci Archive

The Ambiguous Legacy of Kuhn's Structure for Normative Philosophy of Science

Tsou, Jonathan Y. (2024) The Ambiguous Legacy of Kuhn's Structure for Normative Philosophy of Science. Kuhn's The Structure of Scientific Revolutions at 60. pp. 217-234.

This is the latest version of this item.

[img]
Preview
Text
Tsou-2024-Ambiguous-Legacy-Structure-Kuhn.pdf

Download (271kB) | Preview

Abstract

This chapter examines the legacy of Kuhn’s Structure for normative philosophy of science. As an argument regarding the history of 20th century philosophy of science, I contend that the main legacy of Structure was destructive: Structure shifted philosophy of science away from addressing general normative philosophical issues (e.g., the demarcation problem, empirical testability) towards more deflationary and local approaches to normative issues. This is evident in the first generation of post-Structure philosophers of science in the 1980s and 1990s, who adopted a pluralist approach to HPS. As a metaphilosophical argument regarding the methods adopted in HPS, I argue that there are a plurality of legitimate philosophical methodologies for inferring normative claims from historical cases. I frame this argument as a response to Pitt’s dilemma of case studies. I reject Pitt’s dilemma for its presupposition of an unrealistic and unfruitful standard (viz., epistemic certainty) for assessing HPS arguments and its analysis of philosophical methodology at the level of individual arguments. Pitt’s dilemma is most usefully understood as identifying potential points of criticism for HPS arguments. The chapter begins with an examination of Kuhn’s normative philosophy of science in Structure and his position that historical cases provide evidence for philosophical claims. Kuhn’s philosophical methodology is insufficiently articulated, and his utilization of case studies is subject to objections (viz., interpretative bias, hasty generalization) implied by Pitt’s dilemma. I subsequently examine four post-Kuhnian methodological perspectives: (1) Ian Hacking’s particularism, (2) Helen Longino’s practice-based approach, (3) Michael Friedman’s neo-Kantianism, and (4) Hasok Chang’s complementary science. These views suggest alternative methodological strategies in HPS for addressing normative issues. I conclude by articulating some outstanding methodological challenges for the pluralist tradition of HPS—associated with the Stanford and Minnesota schools of philosophy of science—that emerged in the 1980s and remains influential.


Export/Citation: EndNote | BibTeX | Dublin Core | ASCII/Text Citation (Chicago) | HTML Citation | OpenURL
Social Networking:
Share |

Item Type: Published Article or Volume
Creators:
CreatorsEmailORCID
Tsou, Jonathan Y.Jonathan.Tsou@utdallas.edu0000-0002-3939-1518
Keywords: Kuhn, normative philosophy of science, history and philosophy of science, dilemma of case studies, pluralism, disunity of science
Subjects: General Issues > Experimentation
General Issues > Feminist Approaches
General Issues > History of Philosophy of Science
General Issues > History of Science Case Studies
General Issues > Logical Positivism/Logical Empiricism
General Issues > Philosophers of Science
General Issues > Realism/Anti-realism
General Issues > Science vs. Pseudoscience
General Issues > Social Epistemology of Science
Depositing User: Jonathan Y. Tsou
Date Deposited: 10 Jun 2024 16:14
Last Modified: 10 Jun 2024 16:14
Item ID: 23549
Journal or Publication Title: Kuhn's The Structure of Scientific Revolutions at 60
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Official URL: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781009122696.018
DOI or Unique Handle: 10.1017/9781009122696.018
Subjects: General Issues > Experimentation
General Issues > Feminist Approaches
General Issues > History of Philosophy of Science
General Issues > History of Science Case Studies
General Issues > Logical Positivism/Logical Empiricism
General Issues > Philosophers of Science
General Issues > Realism/Anti-realism
General Issues > Science vs. Pseudoscience
General Issues > Social Epistemology of Science
Date: 2024
Page Range: pp. 217-234
URI: https://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/id/eprint/23549

Available Versions of this Item

Monthly Views for the past 3 years

Monthly Downloads for the past 3 years

Plum Analytics

Altmetric.com

Actions (login required)

View Item View Item