Laboratory of History, Philosophy and Biology Teaching | Biology Institute, Federal University of Bahia, Rua Barão de Jeremoabo, s/n, Campus Ondina, Salvador, BA, 40170-115, Brazil.
Inter- and Transdisciplinary Studies in Ecology and Evolution, National Institute of Science and Technology, Rua Barão de Jeremoabo, s/n, Campus Ondina, Salvador, BA, 40170-115, Brazil.
Hist Philos Life Sci. 2020 Oct 14;42(4):51. doi: 10.1007/s40656-020-00338-7.
Scientific understanding as a subject of inquiry has become widely discussed in philosophy of science and is often addressed through case studies from history of science. Even though these historical reconstructions engage with details of scientific practice, they usually provide only limited information about the gradual formation of understanding in ongoing processes of model and theory construction. Based on a qualitative ethnographic study of an ecological research project, this article shifts attention from understanding in the context of historical case studies to evidence of current case studies. By taking de Regt's (Understanding scientific understanding. Oxford University Press, New York, 2017) contextual theory of scientific understanding into the field, it confirms core tenets of the contextual theory (e.g. the crucial role of visualization and visualizability) suggesting a normative character with respect to scientific activities. However, the case study also shows the limitations of de Regt's latest version of this theory as an attempt to explain the development of understanding in current practice. This article provides a model representing the emergence of scientific understanding that exposes main features of scientific understanding such as its gradual formation, its relation to skills and imagination, and its capacity for knowledge selectivity. The ethnographic evidence presented here supports the claim that something unique can be learned by looking into ongoing research practices that can't be gained by studying historical case studies.
科学理解作为一个探究的主题,在科学哲学中已经得到了广泛的讨论,并且通常通过科学史的案例研究来解决。尽管这些历史重建涉及到科学实践的细节,但它们通常只提供了关于模型和理论构建的持续过程中理解的逐渐形成的有限信息。基于对一个生态研究项目的定性民族志研究,本文将注意力从历史案例研究的背景下的理解转移到当前案例研究的证据上。通过将德雷格特(理解科学理解。牛津大学出版社,纽约,2017)的科学理解的语境理论引入该领域,它证实了语境理论的核心原则(例如,可视化和可可视化的关键作用),这表明了与科学活动有关的规范性特征。然而,该案例研究也显示了德雷格特最新版本的这一理论作为解释当前实践中理解发展的尝试的局限性。本文提供了一个代表科学理解出现的模型,揭示了科学理解的主要特征,如其逐渐形成、与技能和想象力的关系,以及其知识选择性的能力。这里提出的民族志证据支持了这样一种观点,即通过研究正在进行的研究实践,可以了解到一些独特的东西,而这些东西是通过研究历史案例研究无法获得的。