The Journey from Discovery to Scientific Change: Scientific Communities, Shared Models, and Specialised Vocabulary

References

• Abrahamsen, Adele, and William Bechtel. 2015. “Diagrams as Tools for Scientific Reasoning.” Review of Philosophy and Psychology 6: 117–131. doi: 10.1007/s13164-014-0215-2
   Google Scholar
• Aguzzi, A., and C. Weissmann. 1997. “Prion Research: The Next Frontiers.” Nature 389: 795–798. doi: 10.1038/39758
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Allen, Thomas. 1966. Managing the Flow of Scientific and Technical Information. Cambridge, MA: MIT School of Management Press.
   Google Scholar
• Anfinsen, Christian B. 1973. “Principles that Govern the Folding of Protein Chains.” Science 181: 223–230. doi: 10.1126/science.181.4096.223
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arjona, A., L. Simarro, R. Islinger, N. Nishida, and L. Manuelidis. 2004. “Two Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease Agents Reproduce Prion Protein-independent Identities in Cell Cultures.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA 101: 8768–8773. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0400158101
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arnett, Ronald C., and Annette M. Holba. 2012. An Overture to Philosophy of Communication: The Carrier of Meaning. New York: Peter Lang.
   Google Scholar
• Baker, C. A., D. Martin, and L. Manuelidis. 2002. “Microglia from Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease-infected Brains Are Infectious and Show Specific mRNA Activation Profiles.” Journal of Virology 76: 10905–10913. doi: 10.1128/JVI.76.21.10905-10913.2002
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bechtel, William, ed. 1986. Integrating Scientific Disciplines: Case Studies from the Life Sciences. Dordrecht: Martinus Nijhoff.
   Google Scholar
• Bechtel, William. 1993. “Integrating Sciences by Creating New Disciplines: The Case of Cell Biology.” Biology and Philosophy 8: 277–299. doi: 10.1007/BF00860430
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bechtel, William, and Adele Abrahamsen. 2005. “Explanation: A Mechanist Alternative.” Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 36: 421–441. doi: 10.1016/j.shpsc.2005.03.010
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bechtel, William, and Robert C. Richardson. 1993. Discovering Complexity: Decomposition and Localization as Strategies in Scientific Research. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Brown, Harold. 1983. “Incommensurability.” Inquiry 26: 3–29. doi: 10.1080/00201748308601983
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chargaff, Erwin, Stephen Zamenhof, and Charlotte Green. 1950. “Human Desoxypentose Nucleic Acid: Composition of Human Desoxypentose Nucleic Acid.” Nature 165: 756–757. doi: 10.1038/165756b0
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chesebro, Bruce. 1998. “PRION DISEASES: Enhanced: BSE and Prions: Uncertainties about the Agent.” Science 279: 42–43. doi: 10.1126/science.279.5347.42
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cole, Jonathan R. 1979. Fair Science: Women in the Scientific Community. New York: Free Press.
   Google Scholar
• Collinge, John, Michele Gorman, Fleur Hudson, Angus Kennedy, Geraldine Keogh, Suvankar Pal, Martin Rossor, et al. 2009. “Safety and Efficacy of Quinacrine in Human Prion Disease (PRION-1 Study): A Patient-preference Trial.” Lancet Neurology 8: 334–344. doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(09)70049-3
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Comfort, Nathaniel. 2001. The Tangled Field: Barbara McClintock’s Search for the Patterns of Genetic Control. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Craver, Carl F. 2006. “When Mechanistic Models Explain.” Synthese 153: 355–376. doi: 10.1007/s11229-006-9097-x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Craver, Carl F. 2007. Explaining the Brain: Mechanisms and the Mosaic Unity of Neuroscience. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Craver, Carl F., and Lindley Darden. 2013. In Search of Mechanisms: Discoveries across the Life Sciences. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Crick, Francis H. 1957. “On Protein Synthesis.” Symposium of the Society of Experimental Biology 12: 138–163.
   Google Scholar
• D’Agostino, Fred. 2005. “Kuhn’s Risk-spreading Argument and the Organization of Scientific Communities.” Episteme 1: 201–209. doi: 10.3366/epi.2004.1.3.201
   Google Scholar
• D’Agostino, Fred. 2008. “Naturalizing the Essential Tension.” Synthese 162: 275–308. doi: 10.1007/s11229-007-9192-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• D’Agostino, Fred. 2010. Naturalizing Epistemology: Thomas Kuhn and the ‘Essential Tension’. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Darden, Lindley. 1991. Theory Change in Science: Strategies from Mendelian Genetics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Darden, Lindley. 2006. Reasoning in Biological Discoveries: Essays on Mechanism, Interfield Relations, and Anomaly Resolution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Darden, Lindley. 2007. “Mechanisms and Models.” In The Cambridge Companion to the Philosophy of Biology, edited by David L. Hull and Michael Ruse, 139–159. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Darden, Lindley, and Nancy Maull. 1977. “Interfield Theories.” Philosophy of Science 44: 43–64. doi: 10.1086/288723
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DeLanda, Manuel. 2015. Philosophical Chemistry: Genealogy of a Scientific Field. London: Bloomsbury.
   Google Scholar
• Fedoroff, Nina, and David Botstein. 1992. The Dynamic Genome: Barbara McClintock’s Ideas in the Century of Genetics. New York: Cold Springs Harbor University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Feyerabend, Paul K. 1975. Against Method. London: Verso.
   Google Scholar
• Fleck, Ludwik. 1979. Genesis and Development of a Scientific Fact. Translated by Frederick Bradley and Thaddeus J. Trenn. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Friedman, Michael. 2001. Dynamics of Reason. Stanford, CA: Center for the Study of Language and Information.
   Google Scholar
• Fuller, Steve. 2000. Governance of Science: Ideology and the Future of the Open Society. London: Open University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fuller, Steve. 2002. Social Epistemology. 2nd ed. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Galison, Peter. 1997. Image and Logic: A Material Culture of Microphysics. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Garvey, William D. 1979. Communication: The Essence of Science. Oxford: Pergamon.
   Google Scholar
• Giere, Ronald N. 1988. Explaining Science: A Cognitive Approach. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Glennan, Stuart S. 2002. “Rethinking Mechanistic Explanation.” Philosophy of Science 69 (Proceedings): S342–S353. doi: 10.1086/341857
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Glennan, Stuart S. 2005. “Modeling Mechanisms.” Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 36: 443–464. doi: 10.1016/j.shpsc.2005.03.011
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Godfrey-Smith, Peter. 2007. “The Strategy of Model-based Science.” Biology and Philosophy 21: 725–740. doi: 10.1007/s10539-006-9054-6
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goldman, Alvin I. 1993. “Epistemic Folkways and Scientific Epistemology.” Philosophical Issues 3: 271–285. doi: 10.2307/1522948
   Google Scholar
• Goldschmidt, Richard. 1951. “Chromosomes and Genes.” Cold Spring Harbor Symposia on Quantitative Biology 16: 1–11. doi: 10.1101/SQB.1951.016.01.003
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Goodman, Nelson. 1955. Fact, Fiction and Forecast. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gralewska-Vickery, A. 1976. “Communication and Information Needs of Earth Science Engineers.” Information Processing and Management 12: 251–282. doi: 10.1016/0306-4573(76)90065-0
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Green, Mel. 1992. “Annals of Mobile DNA Elements in Drosophila: The Impact and Influence of Barbara McClintock.” In The Dynamic Genome: Barbara McClintock’s Ideas in the Century of Genetics, edited by Nina Fedoroff, and David Botstein, 117–122. New York: Cold Springs Harbor University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gross, Alan G., and Joseph E. Harmon. 2014. Science from Sight to Insight: How Scientists Illustrate Meaning. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hagstrom, Warren O. 1965. The Scientific Community. New York: Basic Books.
   Google Scholar
• Hardwig, John. 1985. “Epistemic Dependence.” Journal of Philosophy 82: 335–349. doi: 10.2307/2026523
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hardwig, John. 1991. “The Role of Trust in Knowledge.” Journal of Philosophy 88: 693–704. doi: 10.2307/2027007
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Havelock, Ronald G. 1969. Comparative Study of the Literature on the Dissemination and Utilization of Scientific Knowledge. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hitchcock, Christopher. 2009. “Causal Modelling.” In The Oxford Handbook of Causation, edited by Helen Beebee, Christopher Hitchcock, and Peter Menzies, 299–314. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hoyningen-Huene, Paul. 1993. Reconstructing Scientific Revolutions: Thomas S. Kuhn’s Philosophy of Science. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hull, David L. 1973. Darwin and His Critics: The Reception of Darwin’s Theory of Evolution by the Scientific Community. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hull, David L. 1988. Science as a Process: An Evolutionary Account of the Social and Conceptual Development of Science. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Illari, Phyllis McKay, and Jon Williamson. 2012. “What Is a Mechanism? Thinking about Mechanisms across the Sciences.” European Journal for Philosophy of Science 2: 119–135. doi: 10.1007/s13194-011-0038-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jacobs, Struan. 2002. “The Genesis of ‘Scientific Community’.” Social Epistemology 16: 157–168. doi: 10.1080/02691720210150792
   Google Scholar
• Jacobs, Struan. 2006. “Models of Scientific Community: Charles Sanders Peirce to Thomas Kuhn.” Interdisciplinary Science Reviews 31: 163–173. doi: 10.1179/030801806X103361
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• James, T. L., H. Liu, N. B. Ulyanov, S. Farr-Jones, H. Zhang, D. G. Donne, K. Kaneko, et al. 1997. “Solution Structure of a 142-residue Recombinant Prion Protein Corresponding to the Infectious Fragment of the Scrapie Isoform.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA 94: 10086–10091. doi: 10.1073/pnas.94.19.10086
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jeffrey, M. 2006. “Transportation of Prion Protein across the Intestinal Mucosa of Scrapie-susceptible and Scrapie-resistant Sheep.” Journal of Pathology 209: 4–14. doi: 10.1002/path.1962
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaplan, David M., and Carl F. Craver. 2011. “The Explanatory Force of Dynamical and Mathematical Models in Neuroscience: A Mechanistic Perspective.” Philosophy of Science 78: 601–627. doi: 10.1086/661755
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keller, Evelyn Fox. 1983. A Feeling for the Organism: The Life and Work of Barbara McClintock. New York: W. H. Freeman.
   Google Scholar
• Kitcher, Philip. 1990. “The Division of Cognitive Labor.” Journal of Philosophy 87: 5–22. doi: 10.2307/2026796
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Knorr-Cetina, Karin. 1981. The Manufacture of Knowledge: An Essay on the Constructivist and Contextual Nature of Science. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
   Google Scholar
• Knorr-Cetina, Karin. 1999. Epistemic Cultures: How the Sciences Make Knowledge. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kohlstedt, Sally Gregory. 1976. The Formation of the American Scientific Community: The American Associaton for the Advancement of Science, 1848–1860. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kuhn, Thomas S. 1962. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kuhn, Thomas S. 1977. “The Essential Tension: Tradition and Innovation in Scientific Research.” In Thomas S. Kuhn, The Essential Tension: Selected Studies in Scientific Tradition and Change, 225–239. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kusch, Martin. 2002. Knowledge by Agreement: The Programme of Communitarian Epistemology. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
   Google Scholar
• Latour, Bruno. 1988. “Drawing Things Together.” In Representation in Scientific Practice, edited by Michael Lynch and Steve Woolgar, 19–68. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Laudan, Larry. 1977. Progress and Its Problems: Towards a Theory of Scientific Growth. Berkeley: University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lynch, Michael. 1988. “The Externalized Retina: Selection and Mathematization in the Visual Documentation of Objects in the Life Sciences.” In Representation in Scientific Practice, edited by Michael Lynch and Steve Woolgar, 153–186. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lynch, Michael, and Steve Woolgar, eds. 1988. Representation in Scientific Practice. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Machamer, Peter, Lindley Darden, and Carl F. Craver. 2000. “Thinking About Mechanisms.” Philosophy of Science 67: 1–25. doi: 10.1086/392759
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Manuelidis, L. 2007. “A 25 nm Virion is the Likely Cause of Transmissible Spongiform Encephalopathies.” Journal of Cellular Biochemistry 100: 897–915. doi: 10.1002/jcb.21090
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McClintock, Barbara. 1948. “Correspondence from McClintock to S. G. Stephens.” Barbara McClintock Papers Project, American Philosophical Society. http://www.amphilsoc.org/collections/view?docId=ead/Mss.Ms.Coll.79-ead.xml.
   Google Scholar
• McClintock, Barbara. 1961. “Some Parallels between Gene Control Systems in Maize and in Bacteria.” American Naturalist 95: 265–277. doi: 10.1086/282188
   Google Scholar
• McClintock, Barbara. 1978. “Mechanisms that Rapidly Reorganize the Genome.” Stadler Genetic Symposium 10: 1–29.
   Google Scholar
• McClintock, Barbara. [1956] 1992. “Intranuclear Systems Controlling Gene Action and Mutation.” In The Dynamic Genome: Barbara McClintock’s Ideas in the Century of Genetics, edited by Nina Fedoroff and David Botstein, 185–204. New York: Cold Springs Harbor University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Miller, Greg. 2009. “Could They All Be Prion Diseases?” Science 326: 1337–1339. doi: 10.1126/science.326.5958.1337
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Monod, Jacques, and François Jacob. 1961. “Teleonomic Mechanisms in Cellular Metabolism, Growth, and Differentiation.” Cold Spring Harbor Symposium on Quantitative Biology 20: 394–395.
   Google Scholar
• Pan, K.-M., M. Baldwin, J. Nguyen, M. Gasset, A. Serman, D. Groth, I. Mehlhorn, et al. 1993. “Conversion of α-helices into β-sheets Features in the Formation of the Scrapie Prion Proteins.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA 90: 10962–10966. doi: 10.1073/pnas.90.23.10962
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peirce, Charles Sanders. [1887] 1992. “The Fixation of Belief.” In The Essential Peirce, edited by Nathan Houser and Christian Kloesel, vol. 1, 109–123. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Piccinini, Gualtiero, and Carl F. Craver. 2011. “Integrating Psychology and Neuroscience: Functional Analyses as Mechanism Sketches.” Synthese 183: 283–311. doi: 10.1007/s11229-011-9898-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Polanyi, Michael. 1951. The Logic of Liberty. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Price, Derek J. de Solla. 1969. “The Structures of Publication in Science and Technology.” In Factors in the Transfer of Technology, edited by William H. Gruber and Donald G. Marquis, 91–104. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Price, Derek J. de Solla, and Donald B. Beaver. 1966. “Collaboration in an Invisible College.” American Psychologist 21: 1011–1018. doi: 10.1037/h0024051
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pronk, Sander, Szilárd Páll, Roland Schulz, Per Larsson, Pär Bjelkmar, Rossen Apostolov, Michael R. Shirts, et al. 2013. “GROMACS 4.5: A High-throughput and Highly Parallel Open Source Molecular Simulation Toolkit.” Bioinformatics 29: 845–854. doi: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btt055
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prusiner, Stanley B. 1998. “Nobel Lecture: Prions.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA 95: 13363–13383. doi: 10.1073/pnas.95.23.13363
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prusiner, Stanley B. 1999. Prion Biology and Disease. New York: Cold Springs Harbor Laboratory Press.
   Google Scholar
• Prusiner, Stanley B. 2001. “Shattuck Lecture: Neurodegenerative Diseases and Prions.” New England Journal of Medicine 344: 1516–1526. doi: 10.1056/NEJM200105173442006
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prusiner, Stanley B. 2014. Madness and Memory: The Discovery of Prions—A New Biological Principle of Disease. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ravetz, Jerome R. 1971. Scientific Knowledge and Its Social Problems. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rehg, William. 2009. Cogent Science in Context: The Science Wars, Argumentation Theory, and Habermas. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rhodes, Marcus M. 1992. “The Early Years of Maize Genetics.” In The Dynamic Genome: Barbara McClintock’s Ideas in the Century of Genetics, edited by Nina Fedoroff and David Botstein, 45–72. New York: Cold Springs Harbor University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Roe, Sarah M. Forthcoming. “Darwin’s Quandary.”
   Google Scholar
• Rooman, Marianne, Yves Dehouck, Jean Marc Kwasigroch, Christophe Biot, and Dimitri Gilis. 2002. “What Is Paradoxical about Levinthal Paradox?” Journal of Biomolecular Structure and Dynamics 20: 327–329. doi: 10.1080/07391102.2002.10506850
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Royce, Josiah. 1968. The Problem of Christianity. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Scerri, Eric R. 2006. The Periodic Table: Its Story and Its Significance. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Shapin, Steven. 1994. A Social History of Truth: Civility and Science in Seventeenth-century England. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sheredos, Benjamin, Daniel Burnston, Adele Abrahamsen, and William Bechtel. 2013. “Why Do Biologists Use So Many Diagrams?” Philosophy of Science 80: 931–944. doi: 10.1086/674047
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Staley, Kent W. 2004. The Evidence for the Top Quark: Objectivity and Bias in Collaborative Experimentation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Tatzelt, J., S. B. Prusiner, and W. J. Welch. 1996. “Chemical Chaperones Interfere with the Formation of Scrapie Prion Protein.” European Molecular Biology Organization Journal 15: 6363–6373.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vickery, Brian C. 2000. Scientific Communication in History. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press.
   Google Scholar
• Watkins, John W. N. 1970. “Against ‘Normal Science’.” In Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge, edited by Imre Lakatos and Alan Musgrave, 25–37. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Watson, James D. 2012. The Annotated and Illustrated Double Helix. Edited by Alexander Gann and Jan Witkowski. New York: Simon and Schuster.
   Google Scholar
• Welbourne, Michael. 1993. The Community of Knowledge. Aldershot: Gregg Revivals.
   Google Scholar
• Welch, W. J., and C. R. Brown. 1996. “Influence of Molecular and Chemical Chaperones on Protein Folding.” Cell Stress and Chaperones 1: 109–115. doi: 10.1379/1466-1268(1996)001<0109:IOMACC>2.3.CO;2
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Woody, Andrea. 2004. “More Telltale Signs: What Attention to Representation Reveals about Scientific Explanation.” Philosophy of Science 71: 780–793. doi: 10.1086/421416
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wray, K. Brad. 2011. Kuhn’s Evolutionary Social Epistemology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Zaitsev, Igor V. 2009. “Prions: Introducing a Complex Scientific Controversy to a Biology Classroom.” American Biological Teacher 71: 525–530. doi: 10.2307/20565374
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ziman, John. 2000. Real Science: What It Is, and What It Means. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Zuckerman, Harriet, Jonathan R. Cole, and John T. Bruer. 1991. The Outer Circle: Women in the Scientific Community. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar