Hostname: page-component-89b8bd64d-dvtzq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-05-08T13:28:56.050Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Passive Consensus and Active Commitment in the Sciences

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 January 2012

Alban Bouvier
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Gilbert (2000) examined the issue of collective intentionality in science. Her paper consisted of a conceptual analysis of the negative role of collective belief, consensus, and joint commitment in science, with a brief discussion of a case study investigated by Thagard (1998a, 1998b). I argue that Gilbert's concepts have to be refined to be empirically more relevant. Specifically, I distinguish between different kinds of joint commitments. I base my analysis on a close examination of Thagard's example, the discovery of Helicobacter pylori, and two other historical cases involving the Copenhagen school of quantum mechanics and the Austrian school of economics. I also argue that it is difficult to fulfill the condition of common knowledge, even in Gilbert's weak sense. I conclude by raising serious doubts about the very possibility of a certain type of joint commitment, which I refer to as an implicit joint commitment.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Episteme , Volume 7 , Issue 3 , October 2010 , pp. 185 - 197
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Beller, Mara. 1999. Quantum Dialogue: The Making of a Revolution. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Boettke, Peter J. (ed.). 1994a. The Elgar Companion to Austrian Economics. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boettke, Peter J. 1994b. “Introduction.” In Boettke, (1994a), pp. 1–6.Google Scholar
Bouvier, Alban. 2004. “Individual Beliefs and Collective Beliefs in Sciences and Philosophy: The Plural Subject and the Polyphonic Subject Accounts: Case Studies.” Philosophy of the Social Sciences 34(3): 382–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bouvier, Alban. 2007a. “Qu'est-ce qu'un ‘engagement de groupe’ en sciences sociales? L'exemple de l'école autrichienne en économie (de Carl Menger à Murray Rothbard).” In Bouvier, A. & Conein, B. (eds.), L'épistémologie sociale, pp. 255–94. Paris: EHESS.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bouvier, Alban. 2007b. “Collective Belief, Acceptance, and Commitment in Science: The Copenhagen School Example.” Iyyun: The Jerusalem Philosophical Quarterly 56: 91–118.Google Scholar
Chevalley, Catherine. 1991. “Introduction.” In Chevalley, C. (ed.), Niels Bohr, Physique atomique et connaissance humaine. Paris: Gallimard.Google Scholar
Coady, C. A. J. 1992. Testimony: A Philosophical Study. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Cohen, L. J. 1992. An Essay on Belief and Acceptance. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Cowen, Tyler. 1991. “What is Austrian Economics?” Unpublished manuscript, George Mason University.Google Scholar
Gilbert, Margaret. 1989. On Social Facts. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Gilbert, Margaret. 1994. “Durkheim and Social Facts.” In Pickering, W. and Martins, H. (eds.), Debating Durkheim, pp. 86–109. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Gilbert, Margaret. 1996. Living Together: Rationality, Sociality, and Obligation. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
Gilbert, Margaret. 2000. “Collective Belief and Scientific Change.” In Sociality and Responsibility, pp. 37–49. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
Gilbert, Margaret. 2002. “Belief and Acceptance as Features of Groups.” Protosociology 16: 35–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goldman, Alvin. 1999. Knowledge in a Social World. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodwin, C. S. and Worsley, B. W.. 1993. “The Helicobacter Genus: The History of H. pylori and Taxonomy of Current Species.” In Goodwin, C. S. and Worsley, B. W. (eds.), Helicobacter pylori: Biology and Clinical Practice, pp. 1–13. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press.Google Scholar
Hardin, Russell. 2002. Trust and Trustworthiness. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.Google Scholar
Hardwig, John. 1985. “Epistemic Dependence.” The Journal of Philosophy 82: 335–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Howard, Don. 2004. “Who Invented the ‘Copenhagen Interpretation’: A Study in Mythology.” Philosophy of Science 71: 669–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, David. K. 1969. Convention. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Machlup, Fritz. 1981. “Ludwig von Mises: A Scholar Who Would Not Compromise.” In Andrews, J. K. (ed.), Homage to Mises: The First Hundred Years, pp. 19–27. Hillsdale, MI: Hillsdale College.Google Scholar
Mehra, Jagdish and Helmut, Rechenberg. 1982. The Historical Development of Quantum Theory. New York: Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meijers, Anthonie. 1999. “Believing and Accepting as a Group.” In Meijers, A. (ed.), Belief, Cognition and the Will, pp. 59–71. Tilburg: Tilburg University Press.Google Scholar
Pettit, Philip. 2003. “Groups with Minds of Their Own.” In Schmitt, F. F. (ed.), Socializing Metaphysics: The Nature of Social Reality, pp. 167–93. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
Sperber, Dan and Deirdre, Wilson. 1986. Relevance, Communication and Cognition. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Thagard, Paul. 1998a. “Ulcers and Bacteria I: Discovery and Acceptance.” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C 29(1): 107–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thagard, Paul. 1998b. “Ulcers and Bacteria II: Instruments, Experiments, and Social Interactions.” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C 29(2): 317–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
von Mises, Margít. 1976. My Years with Ludwig von Mises. New York: Arlington House Publishers.Google Scholar
Walton, Donald N. and Erik, C. W. Krabbe. 1995. Commitment in Dialogue: Basic Concepts of Interpersonal Reasoning. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Wray, K. Brad. 2001. “Collective Belief and Acceptance.” Synthese 129(3): 319–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar