Case Study of Model Construction and Criticism in Expert Reasoning*

The preceding section of the book has focused on an analysis of spontaneous analogical reasoning processes observed in experts. This provides a foundation for examining the more complex process of scientific theory formation and insight, and this chapter uses evidence from a think-aloud case study to examine whether analogies can play an important role in that process. I begin by reviewing some longstanding controversies in philosophy of science over the sources of new theories and insights in science. I will focus here mostly on “classic” work from 20th-century authors, and refer to more modern approaches later in the book.

Galileo's theory of motion, Faraday's concept of the magnetic field, Darwin's theory of natural selection, and Einstein's theory of relativity are commonly cited examples of creative achievements in science. Each is a major event in the history of scientific ideas, and in each case something very new emerged that affected the entire scientific community and subsequently affected civilization as a whole. Analyzing how such achievements take place is a worthwhile goal, but achieving this goal has unfortunately proven to be surprisingly difficult. In Darwin's case, for example, it is possible to argue that the theory of natural selection was built up gradually through a large number of detailed empirical observations. But on the other hand, it also is possible to argue that the theory was the result of a mental breakthrough well after the Beagle's voyage in the form of an insight that constituted a sudden reorganization of Darwin's ideas. An intermediate position is also possible. Thus, even with respect to specific historical examples, disagreement emerges as to the basic sources and pace of theory change in science.