El argumento del regreso del experimentador y la replicación de experimentos
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1590/S1678-31662010000200005Parole chiave:
Argumento del regreso del experimentador, Experimento, Reproducción experimental, Replicación, Collins, WeberAbstract
El propósito de este trabajo es analizar y criticar el argumento del regreso del experimentador propuesto por Harry Collins en 1985. Para ello, comenzaremos comentando el experimento destinado a detectar ondas de gravedad que diseñó Joseph Weber en la década de 1970. Luego, continuaremos con el análisis y la discusión de las dos versiones del argumento de Collins: la versión epistemológica y la versión ontológica. Finalmente, luego de formular los lineamientos básicos para una teoría de la reproducción experimental, y una elucidación del concepto de replicación, propondremos dos formas de evitar el regreso del experimentador.
Downloads
Riferimenti bibliografici
Ackermann, R. Data, instruments, and theory: a dialectical approach to understanding science. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1985.
Barnes, J. The toils of skepticism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990.
Buchtwald, J. (Ed.). Scientific practice: theories and stories of doing physics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1995.
Cartwright, N. Replicability, reproducibility and robustness: comments on Harry Collins. History of Political Economy, 21, p. 143-55, 1991.
Collins, H. The seven sexes: a study in the sociology of a phenomenon, or the replication of experiments in physics. Sociology, 9, p. 205-24, 1975.
Collins, H. Son of the seven sexes: the social destruction of a physical phenomenon. Social Studies of Science, 11, p. 33-62, 1981.
Collins, H. Changing order: replication and induction in scientific practice. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1985.
Collins, H._____. The meaning of replication and the science of economics. History of Political Economy, 21, p. 123- 42, 1991.
Collins, H._____. Changing order: replication and induction in scientific practice. 2. ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1992.
Collins, H._____. A strong confirmation of the experimenters’ regress. Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics, 25, 3, p. 493-503, 1994.
Collins, H._____. Tacit knowledge, trust and the Q of sapphire. Social Studies of Science, 31, p. 71-85, 2001.
Collins, H._____. The experimenters’ regress as philosophical sociology. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 33, p. 153-60, 2002.
Collins, H._____. Gravity’s shadow: the search for gravitational waves. Chicago/London: University of Chicago Press, 2004.
Culp, S. Objectivity in experimental enquiry: breaking data-techniques circles. Philosophy of Science, 62, p. 430-50, 1995.
Davies, P. En busca de las ondas de gravitación. Barcelona: Salvat, 1987 [1980].
Drake, S. Galileo’s exprimental confirmation of horizontal inertia: unpublished manuscripts. Isis, 64, p. 291-305, 1973.
Franklin, A. The epistemology of experiment. In: Gooding, D.; Pinch, T. & Schaffer, S. (Ed.). The uses of experiment: studies in the natural sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989. p. 437-60.
_____. Avoiding the experimenters’ regress. In: Koertge, N. (Ed.). A house built on sand: exposing postmodernist myths about science. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998. p. 151-65.
_____. Can that be right? Essays on experiment, evidence, and science. Dordrecht/Boston/London: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1999.
_____. Selectivity and discord: two problems of experiment. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 2002.
_____. Are there really neutrinos? An evidential history. Cambridge: WestView Press, 2004.
Franklin, A. & Howson, C. Why do scientists prefer to vary their experiments? Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 6, p. 141-84, 1984.
Garwin, R. & Levine, J. New negative results for gravitational wave detection, and comparison with reported detection. Physical Review Letters, 33, 13, p. 794-7, 1974.
Godin, B. & Gingras, Y. The experimenters’regress: from skepticism to argumentation. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 33, p. 133-48, 2002.
Gooding, D.; Pinch, T. & Schaffer, S. (Ed.). The uses of experiment: studies in the natural sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989.
Hacking, I. Representing and intervening. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996 [1983].
_____. The self-vindication of laboratory sciences. In: Pickering, A. (Ed.). Science as practice and culture. Chicago/London: University of Chicago Press, 1992. p. 29-64.
Hill, D. Dissecting trayectories: Galileo’s early experiments on projectiles motion and the law of fall. Isis, 79, p. 646-68, 1986.
Hones, M. Reproducibility as a methodological imperative in experimental research. PSA, 1, p. 585-99, 1990.
Koertge, N. (Ed.). A house built on sand: exposing postmodernist myths about science. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998.
Knorr-Cetina, K. Relativism – what now. Social Studies of Science, 12, p. 133-6, 1982.
Kuhn, T. S. The essential tension. Selected studies in scientific tradition and change. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1977.
Latour, B. & Woolgar, S. Laboratory life: the social construction of scientific facts. London/Beverly Hills: Sage, 1979.
Laudan, L. A note on Collins blend of relativism and empirism. Social Studies of Science, 12, p. 131-2, 1982.
Levine, J. Early gravity-wave detection experiments, 1960-1975. Physics in Perspective, 6, p. 42-75, 2004.
McKinney, W. When experiments fail: is “cold fusion” science as normal? In: Koertge, N. (Ed.). A house built on sand: exposing postmodernist myths about science. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998. p. 133-50.
Montaigne, M. Essais. Paris: Charpertier, 1862. t. 2.
Naylor, R. Galileo’s theory of projectile motion. Isis, 71, p. 550-70, 1980.
Pickering, A. (Ed.). Science as practice and culture. Chicago/London: University of Chicago Press, 1992.
Polanyi, M. The tacit dimension. New York: Anchor, 1967.
Popper, K. The logic of scientific discovery. London/New York: Routledge, 1959.
Putnam, H. Philosophy of logic. New York: Harper and Row, 1971.
Radder, H. Experimental reproducibility and the experimenters’ regress. PSA, 1, p. 63-73, 1992.
_____. Experimenting in the natural sciences: a philosophical approach. In: Buchtwald, J. (Ed.). Scientific practice: theories and stories of doing physics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1995. p. 56-86.
_____. (Ed.). The philosophy of scientific experimentation. Pittsburg: University of Pittsburgh Press, 2003.
Salmon, W. Scientific explanation and the causal structure of the world. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1984.
Usselman, M.; Reinhart, C. & Foulser, K. Restating Leibig: a study in the replication of experiments. Annals of Science, 62, p. 1-55, 2005.
Weber, J. Detection and generation of gravitational waves. Physical Review, 117, 1, p. 306-13, 1960.
_____. Gravitational radiation. Physical Review Letters, 18, 13, p. 498-501, 1967.
_____. Gravitational wave detector events. Physical Review Letters, 20, 23, p. 1307-8, 1968a.
_____. Gravitational radiation from the pulsars. Physical Review Letters, 21, 6, p. 395-6, 1968b.
_____. Evidence for discovery of gravitational radiation. Physical Review Letters, 22, 24, p. 1320-4, 1969.
_____. Anisotropy and polarization in the gravitational-radiation experiments. Physical Review Letters, 25, 3, p. 180-4, 1970.
_____. Computer analyses of gravitational radiation detector coincidences. Nature, 240, p. 28-30, 1972.
Wiggins, R. & Press, F. Search for seismic signals at pulsar frecuencies. Journal of Geophysical Research, 74, p. 22, 1969.
Will, C. Was Einstein right? Putting general relativity into test. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993.
_____. The confrontation between general relativity and experiment. Living Rev. Relativity, 9, 2006. Accesible en <3. URL (http://www.livingreviews.org/lrr-2006-3)>. Acceso en: 20 oct. 2009.
Dowloads
Pubblicato
Fascicolo
Sezione
Licenza
Copyright (c) 2010 Scientiae Studia
Questo volume è pubblicato con la licenza Creative Commons Attribuzione - Non commerciale - Condividi allo stesso modo 4.0 Internazionale.
A revista detém os direitos autorais de todos os textos nela publicados. Os autores estão autorizados a republicar seus textos mediante menção da publicação anterior na revista. A revista adota a Licença Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.
