001387314 000__ 03298cam\a2200469Ia\4500
001387314 001__ 1387314
001387314 003__ MaCbMITP
001387314 005__ 20240325105110.0
001387314 006__ m\\\\\o\\d\\\\\\\\
001387314 007__ cr\cn\nnnunnun
001387314 008__ 030403s2001\\\\mau\\\\\ob\\\\001\0\eng\d
001387314 020__ $$a9780262284028$$q(electronic bk.)
001387314 020__ $$a0262284022$$q(electronic bk.)
001387314 020__ $$a0585437246$$q(electronic bk.)
001387314 020__ $$a9780585437248$$q(electronic bk.)
001387314 035__ $$a(OCoLC)51969674
001387314 035__ $$a(OCoLC-P)51969674
001387314 040__ $$aOCoLC-P$$beng$$epn$$cOCoLC-P
001387314 050_4 $$aQ175$$b.S652 2001eb
001387314 072_7 $$aSCI$$x075000$$2bisacsh
001387314 08204 $$a501$$221
001387314 1001_ $$aSolomon, Miriam.
001387314 24510 $$aSocial empiricism /$$cMiriam Solomon.
001387314 260__ $$aCambridge, Mass. :$$bMIT Press,$$c©2001.
001387314 300__ $$a1 online resource (xi, 175 pages)
001387314 336__ $$atext$$btxt$$2rdacontent
001387314 337__ $$acomputer$$bc$$2rdamedia
001387314 338__ $$aonline resource$$bcr$$2rdacarrier
001387314 500__ $$a"A Bradford book."
001387314 506__ $$aAccess limited to authorized users.
001387314 520__ $$aFor the last forty years, two claims have been at the core of disputes about scientific change: that scientists reason rationally and that science is progressive. For most of this time discussions were polarized between philosophers, who defended traditional Enlightenment ideas about rationality and progress, and sociologists, who espoused relativism and constructivism. Recently, creative new ideas going beyond the polarized positions have come from the history of science, feminist criticism of science, psychology of science, and anthropology of science. Addressing the traditional arguments as well as building on these new ideas, Miriam Solomon constructs a new epistemology of science. After discussions of the nature of empirical success and its relation to truth, Solomon offers a new, social account of scientific rationality. She shows that the pursuit of empirical success and truth can be consistent with both dissent and consensus, and that the distinction between dissent and consensus is of little epistemic significance. In building this social epistemology of science, she shows that scientific communities are not merely the locus of distributed expert knowledge and a resource for criticism but also the site of distributed decision making. Throughout, she illustrates her ideas with case studies from late-nineteenth- and twentieth-century physical and life sciences. Replacing the traditional focus on methods and heuristics to be applied by individual scientists, Solomon emphasizes science funding, administration, and policy. One of her goals is to have a positive influence on scientific decision making through practical social recommendations.
001387314 588__ $$aOCLC-licensed vendor bibliographic record.
001387314 650_0 $$aScience$$xPhilosophy.
001387314 650_0 $$aKnowledge, Sociology of.
001387314 653__ $$aSOCIAL SCIENCES/Sociology
001387314 655_0 $$aElectronic books
001387314 852__ $$bebk
001387314 85640 $$3MIT Press$$uhttps://univsouthin.idm.oclc.org/login?url=https://doi.org/10.7551/mitpress/6296.001.0001?locatt=mode:legacy$$zOnline Access through The MIT Press Direct
001387314 85642 $$3OCLC metadata license agreement$$uhttp://www.oclc.org/content/dam/oclc/forms/terms/vbrl-201703.pdf
001387314 909CO $$ooai:library.usi.edu:1387314$$pGLOBAL_SET
001387314 980__ $$aBIB
001387314 980__ $$aEBOOK
001387314 982__ $$aEbook
001387314 983__ $$aOnline