Institute for Theoretical Physics, Vossius Center for History of the Humanities and Sciences, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Stud Hist Philos Sci. 2021 Oct;89:164-176. doi: 10.1016/j.shpsa.2021.06.017. Epub 2021 Aug 26.
String theorists are certain that they are practicing physicists. Yet, some of their recent critics deny this. This paper argues that this conflict is really about who holds authority in making rational judgment in theoretical physics. At bottom, the conflict centers on the question: who is a proper physicist? To illustrate and understand the differing opinions about proper practice and identity, we discuss different appreciations of epistemic virtues and explanation among string theorists and their critics, and how these have been sourced in accounts of Einstein's biography. Just as Einstein is claimed by both sides, historiography offers examples of both successful and unsuccessful non-empirical science. History of science also teaches that times of conflict are often times of innovation, in which novel scholarly identities may come into being. At the same time, since the contributions of Thomas Kuhn historians have developed a critical attitude towards formal attempts and methodological recipes for epistemic demarcation and justification of scientific practice. These are now, however, being considered in the debate on non-empirical physics.
弦理论家们坚信他们是从事物理学研究的。然而，他们最近的一些批评者对此表示否认。本文认为，这种冲突实际上是关于在理论物理学中谁拥有做出理性判断的权威。归根结底，冲突的核心是：谁是合格的物理学家？为了说明和理解关于正确实践和身份的不同意见，我们讨论了弦理论家及其批评者对认识论美德和解释的不同理解，以及这些理解是如何从爱因斯坦传记的叙述中得出的。正如双方都声称爱因斯坦是他们的人一样，科学史也提供了成功和不成功的非经验科学的例子。科学史还教导我们，冲突时期往往是创新的时期，在这个时期可能会出现新的学术身份。与此同时，由于历史学家托马斯·库恩（Thomas Kuhn）的贡献，人们对认识论划界和科学实践证明的正式尝试和方法论方法持批判态度。然而，这些现在正在关于非经验物理的辩论中被考虑。
