I think a lot about how and why philosophers of science do historical research. I am working on a series of papers about the relationship between the hows and whys of a particular kind of philosopher of science–those who want (something like) a theory of scientific methodology so as to guide to contemporary practice. However, this got me thinking about how philosophers are taught to do historical research.
In my case, I learned by doing it and reading it. I don’t recall having much formal space to contemplate the hows and whys. (However, this is not to say that no one had thoughts on this.) Happily, Pen Maddy led historically-bent seminars and reading groups my first year, and these issues came up somewhat regularly. For instance, we read and discussed Margaret Wilson’s “History of Philosophy in Philosophy Today” and Howard Stein’s “The Enterprise of Understanding and the Enterprise of Knowledge”–two of my favorite papers–each of which can be seen as addressing the hows and whys of doing historical research in philosophy of science.
But it seems odd to me that the hows and whys of history aren’t given much formal attention in philosophy education. So, I have been collecting writings that I would use for a course on the topic. Here are a few on the list (in addition to the above):
- Bazerman, Shaping Written Knowledge
- Nersessian, Creating Scientific Concepts
- Currie and Walsh, “Frameworks for Historians and Philosophers”
- Levy, “Counterfactuals, Causal Inference, and Historical Analysis”
- White, “The Value of Narrativity in the Representation of Reality”
- Raphael, “Reading Galileo’s Discorsi in the Early Modern University”
The list still needs more how-type readings, however. I have been perusing history department courses for reading suggestions, but still need to narrow it down…Suggestions welcome!
- Who cares about Haag’s theorem? - April 19, 2024
- The Book Report Problem - March 29, 2024
- Announcing the PSA DEI Caucus Affinity Group for Philosophy of Physics - August 24, 2023
Great topic and post! Thank you. Might I recommend Scholl and Raz’s “Towards a methodology for integrated history and philosophy of science”? At the PhilSci Archive: http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/12029/
Oh, that sounds great! Thank you for the suggestion!