2000 HSS/PSA Program 1 - History of Science Society
2000 HSS/PSA Program 1 - History of Science Society
2000 HSS/PSA Program 1 - History of Science Society
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
<strong>PSA</strong> Abstracts<br />
to some science, then, and anti-reductionists with respect to ecology have<br />
treated ecology as not being reductive. This position is contradicted, however,<br />
by some ecologists view <strong>of</strong> their own work as reductive. Recognizing this<br />
tension, I illustrate three kinds <strong>of</strong> reductive research strategies which ecologists<br />
have made use <strong>of</strong> in developing models.<br />
Kevin Elliott University <strong>of</strong> Notre Dame<br />
Chemical Hormesis: Assessing the Warrant for Policy-Driven <strong>Science</strong><br />
This paper examines the epistemological warrant for a toxicological phenomenon<br />
known as chemical hormesis, which may have significant implications for public<br />
policy. Section II argues that conceptual confusion about the nature <strong>of</strong> chemical<br />
hormesis contributes significantly to current disagreements about the status <strong>of</strong><br />
chemical hormesis as a biological hypothesis. Section III provides an analysis <strong>of</strong><br />
seven distinct (though not mutually exclusive) concepts <strong>of</strong> chemical hormesis and<br />
argues that none <strong>of</strong> them are completely satisfactory. Section IV argues that the<br />
conceptual clarification performed in section III suggests at least three ramifications<br />
for ongoing debates about the epistemological status <strong>of</strong> chemical hormesis.<br />
Marc Ereshefsky Department <strong>of</strong> Philosophy<br />
Linnaean Ranks: Vestiges <strong>of</strong> a Bygone Era<br />
We tend to think that there are different types <strong>of</strong> biological taxa: some taxa are<br />
species, others are genera, while others are families. Linnaeus gave us his<br />
ranks in 1731. Needless to say, biological theory has changed since Linnaeus’s<br />
time. Creationism and essentialism have given way to evolutionary theory<br />
and classifications based on genealogical relations. Nevertheless, the vast<br />
majority <strong>of</strong> biologists still assign Linnaean ranks to taxa even though that<br />
practice is at odds contemporary theory. Furthermore, the assignment <strong>of</strong><br />
Linnaean ranks causes a number <strong>of</strong> practical problems, including needless<br />
arguments over the ranks <strong>of</strong> taxa as well as avoidable semantic confusions.<br />
The Linnaean ranks should be abandoned and alternative methods for<br />
displaying the hierarchical relations <strong>of</strong> taxa should be adopted.<br />
216<br />
Don Fallis University <strong>of</strong> Arizona<br />
Measures <strong>of</strong> Epistemic Utility and the Value <strong>of</strong> Experiments<br />
Measures <strong>of</strong> epistemic utility have been used to model the epistemic decisions<br />
<strong>of</strong> truth seekers in general and scientists in particular. (See, for example, Levi’s