Hostname: page-component-77c78cf97d-kmjgn Total loading time: 0.001 Render date: 2026-04-23T16:26:56.243Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Integrative design for thought-experiments

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 February 2024

Daniel Dohrn Open the ORCID record for Daniel Dohrn [Opens in a new window]  and
Angelica Mezzadri
Daniel Dohrn*
Affiliation:
Dipartimento di Filosofia “Piero Martinetti,” Università degli Studi di Milano, Milano, Italy daniel.dohrn@unimi.it https://www.unimi.it/it/ugov/person/daniel-dohrn
Angelica Mezzadri
Affiliation:
Dipartimento di Filosofia e Scienze dell'Educazione, Università degli Studi di Torino, Torino, Italy angelica.mezzadri@unito.it https://www.finophd.eu/phd-students/161
*
*Corresponding author.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Integrative experiment design should be extended to thought-experiments. Thought-experiments are closely connected to “real” experiments. They are involved in devising the design space of theories and possible experiments. The latter may be partitioned into experiments to be really performed and mere thought-experiments. The proposed extension of integrative experiment design lends guidance to a more methodical performance of thought-experiments.

Information

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 47 , 2024 , e39
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press

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

Awad, E., Dsouza, S., Kim, R., Schulz, J., Henrich, J., Shariff, A., … Rahwan, I. (2018). The moral machine experiment. Nature, 563(7729), 59–64. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-018-0637-6CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brown, J. (1991). Thought experiments: A platonic account. In Thought experiments in science and philosophy (pp. 119–128). Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
Dewitt, B., Fischhoff, B., & Salin, N. E. (2019). “Moral machine” experiment is no basis for policymaking. Nature, 567(7746), 31. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-019-00766-xCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dohrn, D. (2018). Thought experiments without possible worlds. Philosophical Studies 175, 363–384. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-017-0871-zCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Foot, P. (1967). The problem of abortion and the doctrine of double effect. In Virtues and vices (pp. 5–15). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Gettier, E. L. (1963). Is justified true belief knowledge? Analysis, 23(6), 121–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hill, M. R. (2005). Sociological thought experiments: Five examples from the history of sociology. Sociological Origins, 3(2), 3–19 .Google Scholar
Kornberger, M., & Mantere, S. (2020). Thought experiments and philosophy in organizational research. Organization Theory, 1(3), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1177/2631787720942524CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuhn, T. (1977). The essential tension. University of Chicago.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Machery, E. (2017). Philosophy within its proper bounds. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nersessian, N. J. (2007). Thought experimenting as mental modeling: Empiricism without logic. Croatian Journal of Philosophy, 7(20), 125–161.Google Scholar
Norton, J. D. (2004). On thought experiments: Is there more to the argument? Philosophy of Science, 71(5), 1139–1151. https://doi.org/10.1086/425238CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Praëm, S. K., & Steglich-Petersen, A. (2015). Philosophical thought experiments as heuristics for theory discovery. Synthese, 192(9), 2827–2842. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-015-0684-6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sorensen, R. A. (1992). Thought experiments. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Stuart, M. T. (2020). The productive anarchy of scientific imagination. Philosophy of Science, 87(5): 968–978. https://doi.org/10.1086/710629CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williamson, T. (2007). The philosophy of philosophy. Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar