350
Views
0
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Research Articles

The difference a method makes: methods as epistemic objects in computational science

References

  • Auxier, Randall E., and Gary L. Herstein. 2017. The quantum of explanation: Whitehead’s radical empiricism. Vol. 9. New York: Taylor & Francis.
  • Bachelard, Gaston. 2002. The formation of the scientific mind. Trans. Mary McAllester Jones. Manchester: Clinamen Press.
  • Back, L., and N. Puwar. 2012. A manifesto for live methods: Provocations and capacities. The Sociological Review 60, no. S1: 6–17.
  • Barry, A. 2005. Pharmaceutical matters: The invention of informed materials. Theory, Culture & Society 22, no. 1: 51–69.
  • Bloor, D. 2005. Toward a sociology of epistemic things. Perspectives on Science 13, no. 3: 285–312.
  • Bourdieu, Pierre. 1977. Outline of a theory of practice. Trans. Richard Nice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Cartwright, N. 1983. How the laws of physics lie. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Collins, H.M. 1974. The TEA set: Tacit knowledge and scientific networks. Science Studies 4, no. 2: 165–85.
  • Degueule, Thomas, Benoit Combemale, and Jean-Marc Jézéquel. 2017. On language interfaces. In Present and ulterior software engineering, 65–75. Cham: Springer.
  • Feyerabend, P. 1993. Against method: Outline of an anarchist theory of knowledge. London: Verso.
  • French, S., and J. Ladyman. 1999. Reinflating the semantic approach. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 13, no. 2: 103–21. doi:10.1080/02698599908573612.
  • Frigg, R., and J. Reiss. 2009. The philosophy of simulation: Hot new issues or same old stew? Synthese 169: 593–613.
  • Garfinkel, H. 1991. Respecification: Evidence for locally produced, naturally accountable phenomena of order, logic, reason, meaning, method, etc. in and as of the essential haecceity of immortal ordinary society (I)—an announcement of studies. In Ethnomethodology and the Human Sciences, ed. Button Graham, 10–19. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Goodwin, C. 1994. Professional vision. American Anthropologist 96, no. 3: 606–33.
  • Hacking, I. 1982. Language, truth and reason. In Rationality and relativism, ed. Martin Hollis and Steven Lukes, 48–66. Oxford: Blackwell.
  • Hacking, I. 1983. Representing and intervening: Introductory topics in the philosophy of natural science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Haraway, D. 1988. Situated knowledges: The science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective. Feminist Studies 14, no. 3: 575–99.
  • Hesse, M.B. 1966. Models and analogies in science. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.
  • Hoffmann, R. 2007. What might philosophy of science look like if chemists built it? Synthese 155, no. 3: 321–36.
  • Humphreys, P. 2009. The philosophical novelty of computer simulation methods. Synthese 169: 615–26.
  • Knorr-Cetina, Karin. 1999. Epistemic cultures: How the sciences make knowledge. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  • Knorr-Cetina, Karin. 2001. Objectual practice. In The practice turn in contemporary theory, 184–97. London: Routledge.
  • Lakatos, I. 1999. Lectures on scientific method. In For and Against Method, ed. Matteo Motterlini, 19–109. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
  • Latour, Bruno. 1993. The pasteurization of France. Trans. Alan Sheridan and John Law. Boston: Harvard University Press.
  • Latour, B. 2000. When things strike back: A possible contribution of ‘science studies’ to the social sciences. British Journal of Sociology 51, no. 1: 107–23.
  • Latour, B., and S. Woolgar. 1986. Laboratory life: The construction of scientific facts. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
  • Law, J. 1992. Notes on the theory of the actor-network: Ordering, strategy, and heterogeneity. Systems Practice 5, no. 4: 379–93.
  • Law, John. 2004. After method: Mess in social science research. London: Routledge.
  • Lury, C. 2012. ‘Bringing the world into the world’: The material semiotics of contemporary culture. Distinktion: Journal of Social Theory 13, no. 3: 247–60.
  • Lury, C. 2013. Topological sense-making: Walking the Mobius strip from cultural topology to topological culture. Space and Culture 16, no. 2: 128–32.
  • Lury, Celia, and Nina Wakeford. 2012. Inventive methods: The happening of the social. London: Routledge.
  • Lynch, M. 1988. The externalized retina: Selection and mathematization in the visual documentation of objects in the life sciences. Human Studies 11, no. 2–3: 201–34.
  • Lynch, M. 1990. Allan Franklin's transcendental physics. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1990, no. 2: 471–85.
  • Magnani, Lorenzo, and Nancy J. Nersessian, eds. 2002. Model-based reasoning: Science, technology, values. New York: Kluwer Academic.
  • McDonough, J.E. 2017. Object-oriented design with ABAP: A practical approach. Pennington: Apress.
  • Merz, M. 1999. Multiplex and unfolding: Computer simulation in particle physics. Science in Context 12, no. 02: 293–316. doi:10.1017/S0269889700003434.
  • Millikan, R.G. 1989. In defense of proper functions. Philosophy of Science 56, no. 2: 288–302.
  • Morgan, M., and M. Morrison. 1999. Models as mediators: Perspectives on natural and social sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Parnas, D.L. 1972. On the criteria to be used in decomposing systems into modules. Communications of the ACM 15, no. 12: 1053–8.
  • Pickering, A. 1995. The mangle of practice: Time, agency, and science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  • Polanyi, M. 1983. The tacit dimension. Gloucester: Peter Smith.
  • Radder, Hans. 2003. Toward a more developed philosophy of scientific experimentation. In The philosophy of scientific experimentation, ed. Hans Radder, 1–18. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press.
  • Rathgeber, F., D.A. Ham, L. Mitchell, M. Lange, F. Luporini, A.T. McRae, G.-T. Bercea, G.R. Markall, and P.H. Kelly. 2017. Firedrake: Automating the finite element method by composing abstractions. ACM Transactions on Mathematical Software (TOMS) 43, no. 3: 1–27.
  • Rheinberger, H.-J. 1992. Experiment, difference, and writing: I. Tracing protein synthesis. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 23, no. 2: 305–31.
  • Rheinberger, Hans-Jörg. 1997a. Experimental complexity in biology: Some epistemological and historical remarks. Philosophy of Science 64, Proceedings of the 1996 Biennial Meetings of the Philosophy of Science Association. Part II: Symposia Papers: S245–54.
  • Rheinberger, H.-J. 1997b. Toward a history of epistemic things: Synthesizing proteins in the test tube. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
  • Rheinberger, H.-J. 2005. A reply to David Bloor: “Toward a sociology of epistemic things”. Perspectives on Science 13, no. 3: 406–10.
  • Riles, A. 2000. The network inside out. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
  • Spencer, M. 2012. Image and practice: Visualisation in computational fluid dynamics research. Interdisciplinary Science Reviews 37, no. 1: 86–100.
  • Spencer, M. 2015. Brittleness and bureaucracy: Software as a material for science. Perspectives on Science 23, no. 4: 466–84.
  • Star, S.L., and K. Ruhleder. 1996. Steps toward an ecology of infrastructure: Design and access for large information spaces. Information Systems Research 7, no. 1: 111–34.
  • Suchman, Lucy A. 1987. Plans and situated actions: The problem of human-machine communication. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Suppes, P. 1960. A comparison of the meaning and uses of models in mathematics and the empirical sciences. Synthese 12, no. 2/3: 287–301.
  • Sutter, H. 2005. The free lunch is over: A fundamental turn toward concurrency in software. Dr. Dobb’s Journal 30, no. 3: 202–10.
  • Todes, S. 2001. Body and world. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  • Winsberg, E. 1999. Sanctioning models: The epistemology of simulation. Science in Context 12, no. 2: 275–92.
  • Winsberg, E. 2009. A tale of two methods. Synthese 169, no. 3: 575–92. doi:10.1007/s11229-008-9437-0.
  • Winsberg, E. 2010. Science in the age of computer simulation. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.