Abstract
After Kuhn (1962) cast doubt on the usefulness of abstract positivist models by appealing to the history of science, many philosophers have felt compelled to use historical case studies in their analyses. Kuhn however did not tell us how to do this. Further, it is not clear exactly what appeals to case studies accomplish. We can frame this issue as a dilemma. On the one hand, if the case is selected because it exemplifies the philosophical point being articulated, then it is not clear that the philosophical claims have been supported, because it could be argued that the historical data were manipulated to fit the point. On the other hand, if one starts with a case study, it is not clear where to go from there – for it is unreasonable to generalize from one case or even two or three.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
Documenting this claim is the object of a project currently in progress, Seeing Near and Far, a Hericlitian Philosophy of Science.
- 2.
This leads me to believe that my colleague Richard Hirsh may be correct when he suggests that if you can’t call the guy up and interview him it isn’t history.
References
Biagioli, M. 1993. Galileo Courtier; the Practice of Science in the Culture of Absolutism. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Butterfield, H. 1931. The Whig Interpretation of History. London: G. Bell.
Galison, P. 1998. Image and Logic; a Material Culture of Microphysics. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Goodman, N. 1953. Fact, Fiction, and Forecast. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Hanson, N.R. 1961. Patterns of Discovery; an Inquiry into the Conceptual Foundations of Science. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
Kuhn, T. 1962. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Lakatos, I. 1971. “History of Science and Its Rational Reconstructions”. In John W. and Gregory C. eds., The Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes. Philosophical Papers Volume I. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.
Pitt, J.C. 1992. “Problematics in the History of Philosophy”. Synthese, 92, 1.
Pitt, J.C. 2007. “Seeing Nature; Origins of Scientific Observation,” published as “La vision de la nature: emergence de l’observation scientifique”. In Burian R.M. and Gayon J. eds., Conceptions De La Science: Hier, Aujourd’hui Et Demain. Paris: Ousia.
Redondi, P. 1987. Galileo Heretic. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Shea, W. 1972. Galileo’s Intellectual Revolution; Middle Period 1610–1632. New York, NY: Science History Publications.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2011 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Pitt, J.C. (2011). The Dilemma of Case Studies. In: Doing Philosophy of Technology. Philosophy of Engineering and Technology, vol 3. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0820-4_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-0820-4_10
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-007-0819-8
Online ISBN: 978-94-007-0820-4
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawPhilosophy and Religion (R0)