Publikation: Modeling as a case for the empirical philosophy of science : the benefits and challenges of qualitative methods
Lade...
Dateien
Zu diesem Dokument gibt es keine Dateien.
Datum
2015
Autor:innen
Herausgeber:innen
ISSN der Zeitschrift
Electronic ISSN
ISBN
Bibliografische Daten
Verlag
Schriftenreihe
Auflagebezeichnung
DOI (zitierfähiger Link)
Internationale Patentnummer
Angaben zur Forschungsförderung
Projekt
Open Access-Veröffentlichung
Core Facility der Universität Konstanz
Titel in einer weiteren Sprache
Publikationstyp
Beitrag zu einem Sammelband
Publikationsstatus
Published
Erschienen in
WAGENKNECHT, Susann, ed., Nancy J. NERSESSIAN, ed., Hanne ANDERSEN, ed.. Empirical Philosophy of Science : Introducing Qualitative Methods into Philosophy of Science. Cham: Springer, 2015, pp. 65-82. Studies in applied philosophy, epistemology and rational ethics. 21. ISBN 978-3-319-18600-9. Available under: doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-18600-9_4
Zusammenfassung
In recent years, the emergence of a new trend in contemporary philosophy has been observed in the increasing usage of empirical research methods to conduct philosophical inquiries. Although philosophers primarily use secondary data from other disciplines or apply quantitative methods (experiments, surveys, etc.), the rise of qualitative methods (e.g., in-depth interviews, participant observations and qualitative text analysis) can also be observed. In this paper, I focus on how qualitative research methods can be applied within philosophy of science, namely within the philosophical debate on modeling. Specifically, I review my empirical investigations into the issues of model de-idealization, model justification and performativity.
Zusammenfassung in einer weiteren Sprache
Fachgebiet (DDC)
100 Philosophie
Schlagwörter
Empirical philosophy of science, Qualitative methods of research, Modeling, De-idealization, Model justification, Performativity
Konferenz
Rezension
undefined / . - undefined, undefined
Zitieren
ISO 690
SVETLOVA, Ekaterina, 2015. Modeling as a case for the empirical philosophy of science : the benefits and challenges of qualitative methods. In: WAGENKNECHT, Susann, ed., Nancy J. NERSESSIAN, ed., Hanne ANDERSEN, ed.. Empirical Philosophy of Science : Introducing Qualitative Methods into Philosophy of Science. Cham: Springer, 2015, pp. 65-82. Studies in applied philosophy, epistemology and rational ethics. 21. ISBN 978-3-319-18600-9. Available under: doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-18600-9_4BibTex
@incollection{Svetlova2015Model-35772,
year={2015},
doi={10.1007/978-3-319-18600-9_4},
title={Modeling as a case for the empirical philosophy of science : the benefits and challenges of qualitative methods},
number={21},
isbn={978-3-319-18600-9},
publisher={Springer},
address={Cham},
series={Studies in applied philosophy, epistemology and rational ethics},
booktitle={Empirical Philosophy of Science : Introducing Qualitative Methods into Philosophy of Science},
pages={65--82},
editor={Wagenknecht, Susann and Nersessian, Nancy J. and Andersen, Hanne},
author={Svetlova, Ekaterina}
}RDF
<rdf:RDF
xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
xmlns:bibo="http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/"
xmlns:dspace="http://digital-repositories.org/ontologies/dspace/0.1.0#"
xmlns:foaf="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/"
xmlns:void="http://rdfs.org/ns/void#"
xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#" >
<rdf:Description rdf:about="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/35772">
<dcterms:abstract xml:lang="eng">In recent years, the emergence of a new trend in contemporary philosophy has been observed in the increasing usage of empirical research methods to conduct philosophical inquiries. Although philosophers primarily use secondary data from other disciplines or apply quantitative methods (experiments, surveys, etc.), the rise of qualitative methods (e.g., in-depth interviews, participant observations and qualitative text analysis) can also be observed. In this paper, I focus on how qualitative research methods can be applied within philosophy of science, namely within the philosophical debate on modeling. Specifically, I review my empirical investigations into the issues of model de-idealization, model justification and performativity.</dcterms:abstract>
<dc:contributor>Svetlova, Ekaterina</dc:contributor>
<dc:language>eng</dc:language>
<foaf:homepage rdf:resource="http://localhost:8080/"/>
<bibo:uri rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/handle/123456789/35772"/>
<dcterms:issued>2015</dcterms:issued>
<void:sparqlEndpoint rdf:resource="http://localhost/fuseki/dspace/sparql"/>
<dc:creator>Svetlova, Ekaterina</dc:creator>
<dcterms:title>Modeling as a case for the empirical philosophy of science : the benefits and challenges of qualitative methods</dcterms:title>
<dcterms:available rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2016-10-27T15:56:19Z</dcterms:available>
<dc:date rdf:datatype="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#dateTime">2016-10-27T15:56:19Z</dc:date>
<dspace:isPartOfCollection rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/34438"/>
<dcterms:isPartOf rdf:resource="https://kops.uni-konstanz.de/server/rdf/resource/123456789/34438"/>
</rdf:Description>
</rdf:RDF>
