Aller au contenu principal
Accès ouvert déclaré 2026 preprint

Scientific understanding across disciplines: in varietate concordia?

0Citations signalées — pas une note de qualité
0Institutions déclarées
0Pays d’affiliation déclarés

Résumé fourni par la source

Understanding is a generally acknowledged aim of science, but the way in which understanding is pursued and criteria for when it is achieved differ widely across scientific disciplines. This paper offers a comparative analysis of this disciplinary variation, aimed at revealing differences as well as commonalities in methods and criteria for achieving understanding. Starting point is the contextual theory of scientific understanding (De Regt 2017), which was developed to accommodate contextual variation in criteria for understanding. While this work focused on historical variation and used mainly case studies from the history of physics, the current paper applies the contextual theory to disciplinary variation. We present brief descriptive accounts of how understanding figures in nine scientific disciplines: mathematics, theoretical physics, astrophysics, chemistry, geoscience, biology, neuroscience, psychology, and the engineering sciences. Subsequently, we compare and evaluate these accounts in light of the contextual theory of scientific understanding.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.

Contrôle bibliographique ouvert

La source scientifique ouverte est momentanément indisponible.

Sujets associés

Philosophy and History of ScienceScience Education and PedagogyHistorical Philosophy and Science

BNTIC News n’est pas le producteur de ces données. Recherche à la demande dans Crossref, OpenAIRE, DOAJ, Europe PMC, HAL, DataCite, ROR et la Banque mondiale, sans clé ; OpenAlex reste optionnel. Aucun service payant requis, aucune donnée externe enregistrée en base. Sources et limites.