`Through thousands of errors we reach the truth'--but how? On the epistemic roles of error in scientific practice

@article{citeulike:937920, abstract = {This essay is concerned with the epistemic roles of error in scientific practice. Usually, error is regarded as something negative, as an impediment or obstacle for the advancement of science. However, we also frequently say that we are learning from error. This common expression suggests that the role of error is not--at least not always--negative but that errors can make a fruitful contribution to the scientific enterprise. My paper explores the latter possibility. Can errors play an epistemically productive role in scientific research? The paper begins with a review of several twentieth-century approaches to error and the various agendas behind them. It is shown that only very few scholars have considered whether errors can be productive. The main part of the paper examines a concrete debate in early nineteenth-century microscopy and analyses how the microscopists coped with the problem of error. Drawing on this material, the article offers some terminological clarifications of the common notion `learning from error'. The conclusion argues that error can indeed play epistemically productive roles in scientific practice.}, author = {Schickore, Jutta }, citeulike-article-id = {937920}, doi = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsa.2005.06.011}, journal = {Studies In History and Philosophy of Science Part A}, keywords = {error, philosophy, scientific\_method, scientific\_practice}, month = {September}, number = {3}, pages = {539--556}, posted-at = {2006-11-09 15:19:51}, priority = {2}, title = {`Through thousands of errors we reach the truth'--but how? On the epistemic roles of error in scientific practice}, url = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsa.2005.06.011}, volume = {36}, year = {2005} }

TY - JOUR ID - citeulike:937920 L3 - citeulike-article-id:937920 N2 - This essay is concerned with the epistemic roles of error in scientific practice. Usually, error is regarded as something negative, as an impediment or obstacle for the advancement of science. However, we also frequently say that we are learning from error. This common expression suggests that the role of error is not--at least not always--negative but that errors can make a fruitful contribution to the scientific enterprise. My paper explores the latter possibility. Can errors play an epistemically productive role in scientific research? The paper begins with a review of several twentieth-century approaches to error and the various agendas behind them. It is shown that only very few scholars have considered whether errors can be productive. The main part of the paper examines a concrete debate in early nineteenth-century microscopy and analyses how the microscopists coped with the problem of error. Drawing on this material, the article offers some terminological clarifications of the common notion `learning from error'. The conclusion argues that error can indeed play epistemically productive roles in scientific practice. IS - 3 JF - Studies In History and Philosophy of Science Part A EP - 556 TI - `Through thousands of errors we reach the truth'--but how? On the epistemic roles of error in scientific practice VL - 36 SP - 539 KW - error KW - philosophy KW - scientific_method KW - scientific_practice AU - Schickore, Jutta PY - 2005/09// UR - http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsa.2005.06.011 ER -