Changing Perspectives: The Technological Turn in the Philosophies of Science and Technology

Chapter
First Online:
Part of the Philosophy of Engineering and Technology book series (POET, volume 23)

Abstract

The philosophy of science and the philosophy of technology share the same fate. The experimental turn in philosophy of science and the empirical turn in philosophy of technology open the black boxes of explanatory models and technical systems, and consider the creation of phenomena and artefacts. And yet, technology is viewed through the lens of science, subservient to or derivative of representation and the relation of mind and world. The philosophy of technoscience and an epistemology of working knowledge introduce a technological turn that affords a view of research as technological practice, both in science and in engineering.

Keywords

Philosophy of technology Empirical turn Technoscience Experimental turn Technological turn Working knowledge Models and modelling 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Arendt, H. (1958). The human condition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  2. Baird, D. (2004). Thing knowledge. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  3. Baird, D., & Nordmann, A. (1994). Facts-well-put. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 45, 37–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Batterman, R. (2009). Idealization and modeling. Synthese, 169, 427–446.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bensaude-Vincent, B. (2009). Les Vertiges de la Technoscience: Façonner le Monde Atome par Atome. Paris: La Découverte.Google Scholar
  6. Bensaude-Vincent, B., Loeve, S., Nordmann, A., & Schwarz, A. (2011). Matters of interest: The objects of research in science and technoscience. Journal for General Philosophy of Science, 42, 365–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bensaude-Vincent, B., Loeve, S., Nordmann, A., & Schwarz, A. (Eds.). (2016). Research objects in their technological setting. Abingdon: Routledge. forthcoming.Google Scholar
  8. Bijker, W., Hughes, T., & Pinch, T. (Eds.). (1987). The social construction of technological systems: New directions in the sociology and history of technology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  9. Boon, M. (2012). Scientific concepts in the engineering sciences: Epistemic tools for creating and intervening with phenomena. In U. Feest & F. Steinle (Eds.), Scientific concepts and investigative practice (pp. 219–243). Berlin: De Gruyter.Google Scholar
  10. Carrier, M. (2011). ‘Knowledge is power’, or how to capture the relationship between science and technoscience. In A. Nordmann, H. Radder, & G. Schiemann (Eds.), Science transformed? Debating claims of an epochal break (pp. 43–53). Pittsburgh: Pittsburgh University Press.Google Scholar
  11. Cartwright, N. (1999). The dappled world: A study of the boundaries of science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Chang, H. (2007). Inventing temperature: Measurement and scientific progress. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Daston, L., & Galison, P. (2007). Objectivity. New York: Zone Books.Google Scholar
  14. Descartes (1979). Discourse on Method. (transl. D.A. Cress). Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing.Google Scholar
  15. Descartes (1996). Meditations on first philosophy. (transl. J. Cottingham, rev. ed.) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Forman, P. (2007). The primacy of science in modernity, of technology in postmodernity, and of ideology in the history of technology. History and Technology, 23, 1–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Friedman, M. (2010). A post-Kuhnian approach to the history and philosophy of science. The Monist, 93, 495–515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Galison, P. (1997). Image and logic. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  19. Galison, P. (2016). The pyramid and the ring: A physics indifferent to ontology. In B. Bensaude-Vincent, S. Loeve, A. Nordmann, & A. Schwarz (Eds.), Research objects in their technological setting. London: Routledge. forthcoming.Google Scholar
  20. Glennan, S. (1992). Mechanisms, models, and causation. Ph.D. Dissertation. Chicago: University of Chicago.Google Scholar
  21. Hacking, I. (1983). Representing and intervening: Introductory topics in the philosophy of natural science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Harré, R. (2003). The materiality of instruments in a metaphysics of experiments. In H. Radder (Ed.), The philosophy of scientific experimentation (pp. 19–38). Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.Google Scholar
  23. Heidegger, M. (1967). What is a thing? (transl. W.B. Barton & V. Deutsch). Chicago: Henry Regnery Company.Google Scholar
  24. Heidegger, M. (1977). The question concerning technology. In D. F. Krell (Ed.), Basic writings. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
  25. Heinemann, A.-S. (2013). Kalkül der Logik und Logische Maschine: George Boole und William Stanley Jevons. In R. Krömer & G. Nickel (Eds.), Siegener Beiträge zur Geschichte und Philosophie der Mathematik (Vol. 1, pp. 4–78). Siegen: Universitätsverlag Siegen.Google Scholar
  26. Heßler, M. (2013). Die technisierte Lebenswelt: Perspektiven für die Technikgeschichte. Zeitschrift Geschichte in Wissenschaft und Unterricht, 64(5–6), 270–283.Google Scholar
  27. Hughes, T. (2004). Human-built world: How to think about technology and culture. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  28. Humphreys, P. (2004). Extending ourselves: Computational science, empiricism, and scientific method. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Keller, E. F. (2000). Models of and models for: Theory and practice in contemporary biology. Philosophy of Science, 67, 72–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Kornwachs, K. (2012). Strukturen technologischen Wissens: Analytische Studien zu einer Wissenschaftstheorie der Technik. Berlin: Edition Sigma.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kroes, P., & Meijers, A. (2006). The dual nature of technical artefacts. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 37(1), 1–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Lenhard, J. (2011). Mit allem rechnen. Habilitationsschrift: Universität Bielefeld.Google Scholar
  33. Lenhard, J., Küppers, G., & Shinn, T. (Eds.). (2007). Simulation: Pragmatic constructions of reality (Sociology of the Sciences Yearbook). Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  34. Leonelli, S. (2015). What counts as scientific data? A relational framework. Philosophy of Science, 82, 1–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Machamer, P., Darden, L., & Craver, C. (2000). Thinking about mechanisms. Philosophy of Science, 67, 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Morrison, M. (1999). Models as autonomous agents. In M. Morgan & M. Morrison (Eds.), Models as mediators (pp. 38–65). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Nordmann, A. (2006). Collapse of distance: Epistemic strategies of science and technoscience. Danish Yearbook of Philosophy, 41, 7–34.Google Scholar
  38. Nordmann, A. (2012a). Im Blickwinkel der Technik: Neue Verhältnisse von Wissenschaftstheorie und Wissenschaftsgeschichte. Berichte zur Wissenschaftsgeschichte, 35(3), 200–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Nordmann, A. (2012b). Object lessons: Towards an epistemology of technoscience. Scientia Studiae: Revista Latino-Americana de Filosofia e História da Ciência, 10, 11–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Nordmann, A. (2013). Metachemistry. In J.-P. Llored (Ed.), The philosophy of chemistry: Practices, methodologies, and concepts (pp. 725–743). Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars.Google Scholar
  41. Nordmann, A. (2015a). Review of “Léna Soler, Sjoerd Zwart, Michael Lynch, and Vincent Israel-Jost (eds.) Science after the practice turn in the philosophy, history, and social studies of science”, Notre dame philosophical reviews: An electronic journal, 21 June 2015, https://ndpr.nd.edu/news/58957-science-after-the-practice-turn-in-the-philosophy-history-and-social-studies-of-science/
  42. Nordmann, A. (2015b). Werkwissen oder how to express things in works (Jahrbuch Technikphilosophie, Vol. 1, pp. 81–89). Zürich: Diaphanes.Google Scholar
  43. O’Malley, M. (2011). Exploration, iterativity and kludging in synthetic biology. Comptes Rendus Chimie, 14, 406–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Roush, S. (2005). Tracking truth: Knowledge, evidence, and science. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Schwarz, A., & Krohn, W. (2011). Experimenting with the concept of experiment: Probing the epochal break. In A. Nordmann, H. Radder, & G. Schiemann (Eds.), Science transformed? Debating claims of an epochal break (pp. 119–134). Pittsburgh: Pittsburgh University Press.Google Scholar
  46. Tal, E. (2016). Making time: A study in the epistemology of measurement. The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 67, 297–335.Google Scholar
  47. van Fraassen, B. (2008). Scientific representation: Paradoxes of perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Waters, C. K. (2008). How practical know‐how contextualizes theoretical knowledge: Exporting causal knowledge from laboratory to nature. Philosophy of Science, 75, 707–719.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Winsberg, E. (2010). Science in the age of computer simulation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Wittgenstein, L. (1993). Appendix C: How can ‘knowing’ fit a physical fact? In Philosophical Occasions: 1912–1951 (pp. 422–426). Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing.Google Scholar
  51. Wittgenstein, L. (1994). Philosophische Betrachtungen. Wien: Springer.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Technische Universität DarmstadtDarmstadtGermany

Personalised recommendations