Imagination in Scientific Practice
- PDF / 390,357 Bytes
- 19 Pages / 439.37 x 666.142 pts Page_size
- 4 Downloads / 256 Views
(2020) 10:27
PAPER IN GENERAL PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE
Open Access
Imagination in Scientific Practice Steven French 1 Received: 18 October 2019 / Accepted: 23 April 2020/ # The Author(s) 2020
Abstract What is the role of the imagination in scientific practice? Here I focus on the nature and role of invitations to imagine in certain scientific texts as represented by the example of Einstein’s Special Relativity paper from 1905. Drawing on related discussions in aesthetics, I argue, on the one hand, that this role cannot be simply subsumed under ‘supposition’ but that, on the other, concerns about the impact of genre and symbolism can be dealt with, and hence present no obstacle to regarding imagination as appropriately belief-like. By applying the framework of ‘semi- propositional representations’ and ‘quasi-truth’ to this case I thereby offer a new unitary framework for understanding the epistemology of scientific imagination. Keywords Imagination . Supposition . Scientific practice . Symbolism . Semi-
propositional representation . Quasi-truth
1 Introduction: Einstein’s Invitation Consider the following passage, taken from Einstein’s classic paper, ‘On the Electrodynamics of Moving Bodies’ (Einstein 1905): “Let there be given a stationary rigid rod; and let its length be l as measured by a measuring-rod which is also stationary. We now imagine the axis of the rod lying along the axis of x of the stationary system of co-ordinates, and that a uniform motion of parallel translation with velocity v along the axis of x in the direction of increasing x
Versions of this paper were presented at the work-in-progress seminar of the Centre for History and Philosophy of Science at the University of Leeds and at the 26th Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association in Seattle. I am hugely grateful for the comments and helpful suggestions of Otávio Bueno, Amanda Bryant, Henk de Regt, Aaron Meskin, Alice Murphy, Juha Saatsi, Fiora Salis and Mike Stuart. As ever, they are not to be held accountable for what follows!
* Steven French [email protected]
1
School of Philosophy, Religion and History of Science, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK
27
Page 2 of 19
European Journal for Philosophy of Science
(2020) 10:27
is then imparted to the rod. We now inquire as to the length of the moving rod, and imagine its length to be ascertained by the following two operations ...” The passage continues, “We imagine further that at the two ends A and B of the rod, clocks are placed which synchronize with the clocks of the stationary system, that is to say that their indications correspond at any instant to the “time of the stationary system” at the places where they happen to be. These clocks are therefore “synchronous in the stationary system.” ... We imagine further that with each clock there is a moving observer, and that these observers apply to both clocks the criterion established in § 1 for the synchronization of two clocks.” Here we appear to have an explicit invitation to engage the imagination and what I’d l
Data Loading...
