History and Philosophy of Science

  • Brian Ellis
  • Roderick Home
  • David Oldroyd
  • Robert Nola
  • Howard Sankey
  • Keith Hutchison
  • Neil Thomason
  • John Wilkins
  • John Forge
  • Philip Catton
  • Ruth Barton
Reference work entry

Abstract

This chapter is concerned primarily with the educational roles and academic contributions of programs in history and philosophy of science (hereafter HPS) in Australasia. It focuses mainly on those that are most relevant to the overall project of writing a history of philosophy in Australasia. The philosophy of science has always been an important part of philosophy and so must be given prominence in this review. But the philosophy of science always needs to be discussed in relation to the history of science and to the methodology of its research programs. For it seeks to describe, analyse and evaluate the aims, methods and achievements of science. Therefore, it needs to be informed about the history of scientific thought and discovery and to have a good understanding of scientific research methods. The history, methodology and philosophy of science are, of course, three different enquiries, but it is hard to see how any one of them could be pursued successfully independently of the others. HPS departments around the world have generally acknowledged this fundamental interdependence of aims, and sought, with varying degrees of success, to accommodate them.

Keywords

Scientific Realism Scientific Revolution Dutch Book Theoretical Entity Scientific Research Program 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Agar, N. (1995). Valuing species and valuing individuals. Environmental Ethics, 17, 397–415.Google Scholar
  2. Albury, W., & Oldroyd, D. (1997). From renaissance mineral studies to historical geology in the light of Michel Foucault’s the order of things. British Journal for the History of Science, 10, 187–215.Google Scholar
  3. Albury, W. (1979). La logique = Logic/Etienne de Condillac (trans and Intro: Albury W). New York: Abaris Books.Google Scholar
  4. Ankeney, R. (2006). Individual responsibility and reproduction. In R. Rhodes, L. Francis, & A. Silvers (Eds.), The Blackwell guide to medical ethics. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
  5. Armstrong, D. (1978). Universals and scientific realism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Basalla, G. (1967). The spread of Western science. Science, 156, 611–622.Google Scholar
  7. Bigelow, J. (1988). The reality of numbers: A Physicalist’s philosophy of mathematics. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
  8. Bigelow, J., & Pargetter, R. (1987). Functions. Journal of Philosophy, 84, 181–196.Google Scholar
  9. Bigelow, J., & Pargetter, R. (1991). Science and necessity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Branagan, D. (2005). T. W. Edgeworth David: A life: Geologist, adventurer, soldier and ‘Knight in the Old Brown Hat’. Canberra: National Library of Australia.Google Scholar
  11. Bridges, D., & Luminita, V. (2006). Techniques of constructive analysis. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  12. Buckingham, J. (2002). Leprosy in colonial south India: Medicine and confinement. New York: Palgrave.Google Scholar
  13. Campbell, J. (1999). Rutherford: Scientist supreme. Christchurch: AAS Publications.Google Scholar
  14. Catton, P., & Solomon, G. (1988). Uniqueness of embeddings and space-time relationalism. Philosophy of Science, 55, 280–291.Google Scholar
  15. Catton, P. (1989). Marxist critical theory, contradictions, and ecological succession. Dialogue, 28, 637–653.Google Scholar
  16. Catton, P. (1999). Problems with the deductivist image of scientific reasoning. Philosophy of Science, 66(Proceedings), S452–S473.Google Scholar
  17. Catton, P., & Macdonald, G. (Eds.). (2004). Karl Popper: Critical appraisals. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  18. Catton, P., & Montelle, C. (2012). To diagram, to demonstrate: To do, to see, and to judge in Greek geometry. Philosophia Mathematica, 20, 25–57.Google Scholar
  19. Chalmers, A. (1982). What is this thing called science? An assessment of the nature and status of science and its methods. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  20. Chalmers, A. (1986). The Galileo that Feyerabend missed. In J. Schuster & R. Yeo (Eds.), The politics and rhetoric of scientific method. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  21. Chalmers, A. (1989). How to defend science against skepticism. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 40, 249–253.Google Scholar
  22. Chalmers, A. (1990). Science and its fabrication. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  23. Cheyne, C. (2001). Knowledge, cause, and abstract objects: Causal objections to Platonism. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  24. Cheyne, C., & Worrall, J. (Eds.). (2006). Rationality and reality: Conversations with Alan Musgrave. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  25. Churchland, P., & Hooker, C. (Eds.). (1985). Images of science. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Clendinnen, J. (1982). Rational expectation and simplicity. In R. McLaughlin (Ed.), What? Where? When? Why? (pp. 1–15). Dordrecht: Reidel.Google Scholar
  27. Conant, J. (1945). General Education in a Free Society, Harvard University Report. Cambridge Mass; Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  28. Conant, J. (1947). On understanding science: An historical approach. In Conant, J. et al. (Eds.), Harvard case histories in experimental science (2 vols.). Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Cumming, G. (2008). Replication and P-intervals: P-values predict the future only vaguely, but confidence intervals do much better. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 3, 286–300.Google Scholar
  30. Dowe, D., et al. (2007). Bayes not bust! Why simplicity is no problem for Bayesians. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 58, 709–754.Google Scholar
  31. Duhem, P. (1953). The aim and structure of physical theory (trans: Wiener P). Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  32. Dyason, D. (1977). After thirty years: History and philosophy of science in Australia 1946–1976. In S. Murray-Smith (Ed.), Melbourne studies in education 1977 (pp. 45–74). Melbourne: Melbourne University Press.Google Scholar
  33. Ellis, B. (1965). A vindication of scientific inductive practices. American Philosophical Quarterly, 2, 296–305.Google Scholar
  34. Ellis, B. (1966). Basic concepts of measurement. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Ellis, B. (1971). On conventionality and simultaneity: A reply. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 49, 177–203.Google Scholar
  36. Ellis, B. (1979). Rational belief systems. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  37. Ellis, B. (1987). The ontology of scientific realism. In P. Pettit, R. Sylvan, & J. Norman (Eds.), Essays in honour of J. J. C. Smart (pp. 50–70). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  38. Ellis, B. (1990). Truth and objectivity. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  39. Ellis, B. (2001). Scientific essentialism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  40. Ellis, B. (2002). The philosophy of nature: A guide to the new essentialism. London: Acumen.Google Scholar
  41. Ellis, B., & Bowman, P. (1967). Conventionality in distant simultaneity. Philosophy of Science, 34, 116–136.Google Scholar
  42. Ellis, B., & Lierse, C. (1994). Dispositional essentialism. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 72, 27–45.Google Scholar
  43. Feyerabend, P. (1975). Against method: Outlines of an anarchistic theory of knowledge. London: New Left Books.Google Scholar
  44. Feyerabend, P. (1981). Problems of empiricism (Philosophical Papers; Vol. 2). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  45. Finney, C. (1993). Paradise revealed: Natural history in nineteenth-century Australia. Melbourne: Museum of Victoria.Google Scholar
  46. Finney, C. (1984). To sail beyond the sunset: Natural history in Australia, 1699–1829. Adelaide: Rigby.Google Scholar
  47. Fisher, R. (1935). The design of experiments. Edinburgh: Oliver & Boyd.Google Scholar
  48. Fisher, R. (1957). Dangers of cigarette-smoking. Letter to British Medical Journal, 2(43), 297–298.Google Scholar
  49. Forge, J. (2008). The responsible scientist: A philosophical inquiry. Pittsburgh: Pittsburgh University Press.Google Scholar
  50. Forge, J. (2012) Designed to Kill: The Case Against Weapons Research. Dordrecht: Springer.Google Scholar
  51. Fox, J. (1987). Truthmaker. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 65, 188–207.Google Scholar
  52. Fox, J. (2007). Why we shouldn’t give Ellis a dinch. Analysis, 67 (296), 301–303.Google Scholar
  53. Francis, M. (2007). Herbert Spencer and the invention of modern life. London: Acumen.Google Scholar
  54. Gascoigne, J. (2007). Captain cook: Voyager between worlds. London: Hambledon Continuum.Google Scholar
  55. Gascoigne, J. (1994). Joseph banks and the English enlightenment: Useful knowledge and polite culture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  56. Gascoigne, J. (1998). Science in the service of empire: Joseph banks and the uses of science in the age of revolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  57. Gasking, E. (1967). Investigations into generation, 1651–1828. London: Hutchinson.Google Scholar
  58. Gasking, E. (1970). The rise of experimental biology. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
  59. Gaukroger, S. (1995). Descartes: An intellectual biography. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
  60. Gillings, R. (1972). Mathematics in the time of the pharaohs. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  61. Godfrey-Smith, P. (1989). Misinformation. Canadian Journal of Philosophy, 19, 533–550.Google Scholar
  62. Godfrey-Smith, P. (1992). Additivity and the units of selection. Proceedings of the Biennial Meetings of the Philosophy of Science Association, 1, 315–328.Google Scholar
  63. Godfrey-Smith, P. (1993). Functions: Consensus without unity. Pacific Philosophical Quarterly, 74, 196–208.Google Scholar
  64. Godfrey-Smith, P. (1994). A modern history theory of functions. Noûs, 28, 344–362.Google Scholar
  65. Godfrey-Smith, P. (2000). Information, arbitrariness, and selection: Comments on Maynard Smith. Philosophy of Science, 67, 202–207.Google Scholar
  66. Godfrey-Smith, P. (2001). Three kinds of adaptationism. In S. Orzack & E. Sober (Eds.), Adaptationism and optimality (pp. 335–357). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  67. Godfrey-Smith, P., & Kerr, B. (2002). Individualist and multi-level perspectives on selection in structured populations. Biology and Philosophy, 17, 477–517.Google Scholar
  68. Godfrey-Smith, P., & Sterelny, K. (2007). Biological information. In E. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopaedia of philosophy. Stanford University. http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2007/entries/information-biological/
  69. Griffiths, P. (1992). Adaptive explanation and the concept of a vestige. In P. Griffiths (Ed.), Trees of life: Essays in philosophy of biology (pp. 111–131). Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  70. Griffiths, P. (1993). Functional analysis and proper functions. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 44, 409–422.Google Scholar
  71. Griffiths, P. (1994). Cladistic classification and functional explanation. Philosophy of Science, 61, 206–227.Google Scholar
  72. Griffiths, P. (1996). The historical turn in the study of adaptation. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 47, 511–532.Google Scholar
  73. Griffiths, P. (1997). What emotions really are: The problem of psychological categories. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  74. Griffiths, P. (1999). Squaring the circle: Natural kinds with historical essences. In R. Wilson (Ed.), Species: New interdisciplinary essays (pp. 209–228). Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  75. Griffiths, P. (2001). Genetic information: A metaphor in search of a theory. Philosophy of Science, 68, 394–412.Google Scholar
  76. Griffiths, P. (2002). What is innateness? The Monist, 85, 70–85.Google Scholar
  77. Griffiths, P. (2007). Gene. In M. Ruse & D. Hull (Eds.), Cambridge companion to philosophy of biology (pp. 85–102). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  78. Griffiths, P., & Gray, R. (1994a). Developmental systems and evolutionary explanation. Journal of Philosophy, 91, 277–304.Google Scholar
  79. Griffiths, P., & Gray, R. (1994b). Replicators and vehicles—or developmental systems. Behavioural and Brain Sciences, 17, 623–624.Google Scholar
  80. Griffiths, P., & Gray, R. (1997). Replicator II—judgement day. Biology and Philosophy, 12, 471–492.Google Scholar
  81. Griffiths, P., & Knight, R. (1998). What is the developmentalist challenge? Philosophy of Science, 65, 253–258.Google Scholar
  82. Griffiths, P., & Neumann-Held, E. (1999). The many faces of the gene. BioScience, 49, 656–662.Google Scholar
  83. Griffiths, P., & Stotz, K. (2004). Do genes exist? Genomics Network: The Newsletter of the ESRC Genomics Network, 1, 6–7.Google Scholar
  84. Griffiths, P., & Stotz, K. (2006). Genes in the postgenomic era. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics, 27, 499–521.Google Scholar
  85. Grünbaum, A., Salmon, W., van Fraassen, B., & Janis, A. (1969). A panel discussion of simultaneity by slow clock transport in the special and general theories of relativity. Philosophy of Science, 36, 1–83.Google Scholar
  86. Hearnshaw, J. (2014 [1987]). The analysis of starlight: Two centuries of astronomical spectroscopy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  87. Home, R. (1981). The effluvial theory of electricity. New York: Arno Press.Google Scholar
  88. Home, R. (1992). Electricity and experimental physics in eighteenth-century Europe. Aldershot: Ashgate Variorum.Google Scholar
  89. Home, R. (Ed.). (1988). Australian science in the making. Melbourne: Cambridge University Press and Australian Academy of Science.Google Scholar
  90. Home, R. et al. (Eds). (1998–2006). Regardfully yours: Selected correspondence of Ferdinand von Mueller (3 vols.). New York: Pater Lang.Google Scholar
  91. Home, R., & Kohlstedt, S. (Eds.). (1991). International science and national scientific identity: Australia between Britain and America. Boston: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  92. Home, R., & Connor, P. (1979). Æpinus’s essay on the theory of electricity and magnetism. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  93. Jenkin, J. (2007). William and Lawrence Bragg, father and son: The most extraordinary collaboration in science. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  94. Kitcher, P., & Sterelny, K. (1988). The return of the gene. Journal of Philosophy, 85, 339–361.Google Scholar
  95. Kitcher, P., Sterelny, K., & Waters, K. (1990). The illusory riches of Sober’s monism. Journal of Philosophy, 87, 158–161.Google Scholar
  96. Krips, H. (1987). The metaphysics of quantum theory. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
  97. Kuhn, T. (1962). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  98. Lakatos, I. (1970). Falsification and the methodology of scientific research programmes. In I. Lakatos & A. Musgrave (Eds.), Criticism and the growth of knowledge (pp. 91–195). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  99. Lakatos, I. (1963–1964). Proofs and refutations. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 14, 1–25, 120–139, 221–245, 269–342.Google Scholar
  100. Langham, I. (1981). The building of British social anthropology: W. H. R. Rivers and his Cambridge disciples in the development of kinship studies, 1898–1931. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.Google Scholar
  101. Le Grand, H. (1988). Drifting continents and shifting theories. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  102. Leslie, C. (2008). Exhaustive conditional inference: Improving the evidential value of a statistical test by identifying the most relevant P-value and error probabilities (Ph.D. Thesis). University of Melbourne.Google Scholar
  103. Levy, N. (2004). What makes us moral? Crossing the boundaries of biology. Oxford: Oneworld.Google Scholar
  104. Macdonald, C., & Macdonald, G. (1995). Philosophy of psychology. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  105. Macdonald, C., & Macdonald, G. (Eds.). (2010). Emergence in mind. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  106. Mach, E. (1902). The science of mechanics: A critical and historical account of its development (trans: McCormack T). Chicago: Open Court.Google Scholar
  107. McCalman, J. (1998). Sex and suffering: Women’s health and a women’s hospital: Royal women’s hospital, Melbourne, 1856–1996. Melbourne: Melbourne University Press.Google Scholar
  108. Maclaurin, J. (1998). Reinventing molecular weismannism: Information in evolution. Biology and Philosophy, 13, 37–59.Google Scholar
  109. Maclaurin, J. (2002). The resurrection of innateness. Monist, 85, 105–130.Google Scholar
  110. Mays, W. (1960). HPS in the British Commonwealth universities. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 11, 192–211.Google Scholar
  111. McLeod, R. (2009). Archibald liversidge, FRS: Imperial science under the southern cross. Sydney: The Royal Society of New South Wales and Sydney University Press.Google Scholar
  112. Mein Smith, P. (1986). Maternity in dispute: New Zealand, 1920-1939. Wellington: Government Printer of the New Zealand Department of Internal Affairs.Google Scholar
  113. Mein Smith, P. (1997). Mothers and king baby: Infant survival and welfare in an imperial world: Australia 1880–1950. Basingstoke: MacMillan.Google Scholar
  114. Miller, D. (2004). Discovering water: James Watt, Henry Cavendish and the nineteenth-century ‘water controversy’. Burlington: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  115. Miller, D. (2009). James Watt, chemist: Understanding the origins of the steam age. London: Pickering & Chatto.Google Scholar
  116. Miller, S., & Selgelid, M. (2007). Ethical and philosophical consideration of the dual-use dilemma in the biological sciences. Science and Engineering Ethics, 13, 523–580.Google Scholar
  117. Montelle, C. (2011). Chasing shadows: Mathematics, astronomy, and the early history of eclipse reckoning. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
  118. Moyal, A. (1966). A guide to the manuscript records of Australian science. Canberra: Australian Academy of Science with Australian National University Press.Google Scholar
  119. Moyal, A. (1976). Scientists in nineteenth century Australia: A documentary history. Melbourne: Cassell Australia.Google Scholar
  120. Moyal, A. (1984). Clear across Australia: A history of telecommunications. Melbourne: Collins.Google Scholar
  121. Moyal, A. (1986). A bright and savage land: Scientists in colonial Australia. Sydney: Collins.Google Scholar
  122. Murdoch, D. (1987). Niels Bohr’s philosophy of physics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  123. Musgrave, A. (1983). Facts and values in science studies. In R. Home (Ed.), Science under scrutiny: The place of history and philosophy of science (pp. 49–79). Dordrecht: D. Reidel.Google Scholar
  124. Musgrave, A. (1999). Essays on realism and rationalism. Amsterdam: Rodopi.Google Scholar
  125. Neander, K. (1988). What does natural selection explain: Correction to sober. Philosophy of Science, 55, 422–426.Google Scholar
  126. Neander, K. (1991a). Functions as selected effects: The conceptual analyst’s defence. Philosophy of Science, 58, 168–184.Google Scholar
  127. Neander, K. (1991b). The teleological notion of ‘Function’. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 69, 454–468.Google Scholar
  128. Neander, K. (2002). Types of traits: The importance of functional homologues. In A. Ariew (Ed.), Functions: New essays in the philosophy of psychology and biology (pp. 390–415). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  129. Neyman, J. (1961). The silver jubilee of my dispute with Fisher. Journal of the Operations Research Society of Japan, 3, 145–154.Google Scholar
  130. Nola, R. (2003). Rescuing reason: A critique of anti-rationalist views of science and knowledge. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  131. Nola, R., & Sankey, H. (2007). Theories of scientific method. Montreal: McGill Queens University Press.Google Scholar
  132. Oddie, G. (1986). Likeness to truth. Dordrecht/Boston: D. Reidel.Google Scholar
  133. Oldroyd, D. (1980). Darwinian impacts: An introduction to the Darwinian revolution. Kensington: University of New South Wales Press.Google Scholar
  134. Oldroyd, D. R. (1990). The highlands controversy: Constructing geological knowledge by fieldwork in nineteenth-century Britain. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  135. Oldroyd, D. (1996). Thinking about the earth: A history of ideas in geology. London: Athlone Press.Google Scholar
  136. Oldroyd, D. (1998). Sciences of the earth: Studies in the history of mineralogy and geology. Aldershot: Ashgate Variorum.Google Scholar
  137. Oldroyd, D. (2002). Earth, fire, water and Ice: Two hundred years of geological research in the English Lake District. London: The Geological Society.Google Scholar
  138. Pawson, E., & Brooking, T. (Eds.). (2002). Environmental histories of New Zealand. Melbourne: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  139. Popper, K. (1935). Logik der Forschung zur Erkenntnistheorie der modernen Naturwissenschaft. Vienna: J. Springer.Google Scholar
  140. Popper, K. (1945). The Open Society and its enemies (2 vols.). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  141. Popper, K. R. (1959). The logic of scientific discovery. London: Hutchinson.Google Scholar
  142. Popper, K. (1963). Conjectures and refutations: The growth of scientific knowledge. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  143. Pottage, J. (1983). Geometrical investigations illustrating the art of discovery in the mathematical field. Reading: Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
  144. Price, H. (1996). Time’s Arrow and Archimedes’ point: New directions for the physics of time. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  145. Reichenbach, H. (1935). Warscheinlichkeitslehre: eine Untersuchung über die logischen und mathematischen Grundlagen der Wahrscheinlichkeitsrechnung. Translated as The theory of probability: an inquiry into the logical and mathematical foundations of the calculus of probability. University of California Press, 1948.Google Scholar
  146. Richards, E. (1983). Darwin and the descent of women. In D. Oldroyd & I. Langham (Eds.), The wider domain of evolutionary thought (pp. 57–111). Dordrecht: D. Reidel.Google Scholar
  147. Richards, E. (1991). Vitamin C and cancer: Medicine or politics? Houndmills: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  148. Sankey, H. (1994). The incommensurability thesis. Avebury: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  149. Sankey, H. (1997). Rationality, relativism and incommensurability. Avebury: Ashgate.Google Scholar
  150. Sankey, H. (2000). Methodological pluralism, normative naturalism and the realist aim of science. In R. Nola & H. Sankey (Eds.), After Popper, Kuhn and Feyerabend: Recent issues in theories of scientific method (pp. 211–229). Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
  151. Sapp, J. (1987). Beyond the gene: Cytoplasmic inheritance and the struggle for authority in genetics. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  152. Sapp, J. (1990). Where the truth lies: Franz Moewus and the origins of molecular biology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  153. Schuster, J., & Yeo, R. (Eds.). (1986). The politics and rhetoric of scientific method: Historical studies. Dordrecht: D. Reidel.Google Scholar
  154. Segelid, M. (2007). A tale of two studies: Ethics, bioterrorism and the censorship of science. Hastings Center Report, 37, 35–43.Google Scholar
  155. Shortland, M. (Ed.). (1996). Hugh Miller and the controversies of Victorian science. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
  156. Singer, P. (1976). Animal liberation: A new ethics for our treatment of animals. London: Cape.Google Scholar
  157. Singer, P. (1981). The expanding circle: Ethics and sociobiology. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
  158. Singer, P. (2000). A Darwinian left: Politics, evolution, and cooperation. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  159. Slezak, P. (1991). Bloor’s bluff: Behaviourism and the strong programme. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 5, 241–256.Google Scholar
  160. Slezak, P. (1994). A second look at David Bloor’s knowledge and social imagery. Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 24, 336–361.Google Scholar
  161. Smart, J. (1959). Can biology be an exact science? Synthese, 11, 359–368.Google Scholar
  162. Smart, J. (1963). Philosophy and scientific realism. New York: Humanities Press.Google Scholar
  163. Snow, C. (1959). The two cultures and the scientific revolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  164. Sterelny, K. (1991). Recent work in the philosophy of biology. Philosophical Books, 32, 1–17.Google Scholar
  165. Sterelny, K. (1996a). Explanatory pluralism in evolutionary biology. Biology and Philosophy, 11, 193–214.Google Scholar
  166. Sterelny, K. (1996b). The return of the group. Philosophy of Science, 63, 562–584.Google Scholar
  167. Sterelny, K., & Griffiths, P. (1999). Sex and death: An introduction to philosophy of biology, science and its conceptual foundations. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  168. Thornton, J. (1953). Scientific entities. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 31(1–21), 73–100.Google Scholar
  169. Tobin, W. (2003). The life and science of Léon Foucault: The man who proved the earth rotates. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  170. Turnbull, D. (2000). Masons, tricksters, and cartographers: comparative studies in the sociology of scientific and indigenous knowledge. London: Harwood.Google Scholar
  171. Twardy, C., & Korb, K. (2004). A criterion of probabilistic causality. Philosophy of Science, 71, 241–262.Google Scholar
  172. van Fraassen, B. (1980). The scientific image. Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
  173. Verran, H. (2001). Science and an African logic. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  174. Von Mises R. (1919). Grundlagen der Wahrscheinlichkeitsrechnung, Mathematische Zeitschrift, 5, 52–99.Google Scholar
  175. Wallace, C. (2005). Statistical and inductive inference by minimum message length. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  176. Walley, P. (1991). Statistical reasoning with imprecise probabilities. London: Chapman & Hall.Google Scholar
  177. Yeo, R. (1993). Defining science: William Whewell, natural knowledge, and public debate in early Victorian Britain. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  178. Yeo, R. (2001). Encyclopaedic visions: Scientific dictionaries and enlightenment culture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Brian Ellis
    • 1
  • Roderick Home
    • 2
  • David Oldroyd
    • 3
  • Robert Nola
    • 4
  • Howard Sankey
    • 2
  • Keith Hutchison
    • 2
  • Neil Thomason
    • 2
  • John Wilkins
    • 2
  • John Forge
    • 5
  • Philip Catton
    • 6
  • Ruth Barton
    • 7
  1. 1.School of Communication, Arts and Critical EnquiryLa Trobe UniversityMelbourneAustralia
  2. 2.School of Historical and Philosophical StudiesThe University of MelbourneParkvilleAustralia
  3. 3.School of HumanitiesUniversity of New South WalesSydneyAustralia
  4. 4.Department of PhilosophyThe University of AucklandAucklandNew Zealand
  5. 5.Unit for History and Philosophy of ScienceThe University of SydneySydneyAustralia
  6. 6.Department of PhilosophyUniversity of CanterburyChristchurchNew Zealand
  7. 7.Department of HistoryThe University of AucklandAucklandNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations