14.01.2014 Views

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

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

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

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!