Journal
ERKENNTNIS
Volume 88, Issue 4, Pages 1447-1466Publisher
SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10670-021-00410-z
Keywords
-
Categories
Ask authors/readers for more resources
This paper discusses the value of surprise in science, arguing that surprise exists not only in experiments but also in thought experiments and theoretical derivations. The authors believe that these surprises have a productive impact on the development of science and affect future outcomes.
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.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available