首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
     检索      


The theory theory thrice over: the child as scientist, Superscientist or social institution?
Authors:Michael A Bishop  Stephen M Downes
Institution:a Department of Philosophy, 402 Catt Hall, Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50011-1306, USA;b University of Utah Department of Philosophy, 260 Central Campus Drive Rm 341, Salt Lake City, UT 84112-9156, USA
Abstract:Alison Gopnik and Andrew Meltzoff have argued for a view they call the ‘theory theory’: theory change in science and children are similar. While their version of the theory theory has been criticized for depending on a number of disputed claims, we argue that there is a fundamental problem which is much more basic: the theory theory is multiply ambiguous. We show that it might be claiming that a similarity holds between theory change in children and (i) individual scientists, (ii) a rational reconstruction of a Superscientist, or (iii) the scientific community. We argue that (i) is false, (ii) is non-empirical (which is problematic since the theory theory is supposed to be a bold empirical hypothesis), and (iii) is either false or doesn't make enough sense to have a truth-value. We conclude that the theory theory is an interesting failure. Its failure points the way to a full, empirical picture of scientific development, one that marries a concern with the social dynamics of science to a psychological theory of scientific cognition.
Keywords:Scientific theory change  The theory theory  Children's development  Gopnik and Meltzoff
本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录!
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号