Studying scientific thought experiments in their context: Albert Einstein and electromagnetic induction☆
Introduction
Since the publication of Mach׳s (1897) Über Gedankenexperimente, many eminent philosophers of science such as Alexandre Koyré, Karl Popper and Thomas Kuhn have shown interest in scientific thought experiments (scientific TEs, or STEs, for short). In the contemporary philosophy of science the focus is mainly on their role in the epistemology of science. Our focus on these epistemological issues is of a more indirect nature. We are concerned primarily with the way in which contemporary philosophers of science conceptualize and study the epistemology of STEs: How do they try to answer such epistemological questions?2
We will proceed as follows. After a short sketch of the contemporary philosophical debate in Section 2, we will argue in Section 3 that there are two implicit assumptions about the epistemology of STEs underlying it. The case study in Section 4 will then show how these assumptions can be problematic. Norton (1991)׳s analysis of Einstein׳s magnet-conductor STE, which functions as an example of these two assumptions is, in a sense, both misguided (the thought experiment by itself did not lead Einstein to factual knowledge of the world) and too narrow (to understand the thought experiment׳s epistemology, its historical context should also be taken into account explicitly). Based on this evaluation we propose an alternative philosophical approach to the epistemology of scientific thought experiments in Section 5. This approach is more encompassing while preserving what is of value in the dominant view.
Section snippets
James Robert Brown׳s platonic thought experiments
For Brown, 1986, Brown, 1991a, Brown, 1991b, Brown, 2004, Brown, 2010, Brown, 2013, STEs are philosophically interesting because they deviate from the epistemological norm in science: while “the great bulk of our knowledge must be accounted for along empiricist lines, […] there is […] the odd bit that is a priori and it comes from thought experiments” (1991a, ix). What is epistemologically peculiar about them is the way in which they lead us to a new and better understanding of reality: we make
The epistemology of scientific thought experiments: facts for generic individuals
The overview in the previous section shows that the accounts discussed all differ with respect to particular aspects of the epistemology of scientific TEs: Brown is concerned with how they bring about new a priori knowledge of reality; Norton, on the other hand, is interested in how they generalize and reorganize our knowledge of the natural world; Gendler, finally, focuses on their evidential significance in settling scientific disputes. At the same time, however, the overview also shows that
Einstein׳s magnet-conductor thought experiment
In the opening paragraphs of his special relativity article (1905), Albert Einstein presented what has become known in the philosophical literature as his magnet-conductor thought experiment. He presented it in the following words:
It is well known that Maxwell׳s electrodynamics – as usually understood at present – when applied to moving bodies, leads to asymmetries that do not seem to attach to the phenomena. Let us recall, for example, the electrodynamic interaction between a magnet and a
An alternative proposal: thought experiments transforming context
In 2 The philosophical debate, 3 The epistemology of scientific thought experiments: facts for generic individuals we pointed out that the contemporary philosophical debate on the epistemological role of STEs studied them in terms of a particular conceptualization, which we characterized as (Fac)-(Ind). In Section 4, we discussed John Norton׳s analysis of Einstein׳s magnet-conductor STE as an example of a philosophical analysis based on this conceptualization. We pointed out that there were
References (67)
The evidential significance of thought experiments in science
Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science
(1996)Nature is the realisation of the simplest conceivable mathematical ideas: Einstein and the canon of mathematical simplicity
Studies in History and Philosophy of Modern Physics
(2000)Relativity: The theory and its philosophy
(1980)What is a law of nature?
(1983)On thought experiments as a priori science
International Studies in the Philosophy of Science
(1999)An epistemological role for thought experiments
Why thought experiments are not arguments
Philosophy of Science
(1999)Rethinking thought experiments
Perspectives on Science
(2001)Thought experiments since the scientific revolution
International Studies in the Philosophy of Science
(1986)The laboratory of the mind: Thought experiments in the natural sciences
(1991)
Thought experiments: A platonic account
Philosophy of mathematics: An introduction to the world of proofs and pictures
Why thought experiments transcend experience
The laboratory of the mind: Thought experiments in the natural sciences
What do we see in a thought experiment?
The logic of thought experiments
Synthese
Towards a constructive epistemology of thought experiments in science
Synthese
Knowing what would happen: The epistemic strategies in Galileo’s thought experiments
Studies in History and Philosophy of Science
The role of imagistic simulation in scientific thought experiments
Topics in Cognitive Science
The electrodynamic origins of relativity theory
Historical Studies in the Physical and Biological Sciences
Electrodynamics from Ampère to Einstein
The genesis of the theory of relativity
The dual nature of thought experiments
Philosophica
Imagination׳s grip on science
Metaphilosophy
Laws of nature
Philosophy of Science
Understanding space-time: The philosophical development of physics from Newton to Einstein
Time, space and gravitation
The London Times
Einstein׳s space-time: An introduction to special and general relativity
Einstein׳s clocks, Poincaré׳s maps: Empires of time
Galileo and the indispensability of scientific thought experiment
The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science
Thought experiment: On the powers and limits of imaginary cases
Cited by (2)
Electromagnetic field presented in introductory physics textbooks and consequences for its teaching
2023, Physical Review Physics Education Research
- ☆
The authors would like to thank Peter Verdée, John Norton, Tim de Mey, the audiences of the VAF (Rotterdam 2015) and CLMPS (Helsinki 2015) conferences, and a number of anonymous reviewers for their valuable and insightful questions, comments, and remarks.
- 1
Aspirant (Grant Number 1138716N) van het Fonds Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek - Vlaanderen (FWO - Research Foundation Flanders).