- New
-
Topics
- All Categories
- Metaphysics and Epistemology
- Value Theory
- Science, Logic, and Mathematics
- Science, Logic, and Mathematics
- Logic and Philosophy of Logic
- Philosophy of Biology
- Philosophy of Cognitive Science
- Philosophy of Computing and Information
- Philosophy of Mathematics
- Philosophy of Physical Science
- Philosophy of Social Science
- Philosophy of Probability
- General Philosophy of Science
- Philosophy of Science, Misc
- History of Western Philosophy
- Philosophical Traditions
- Philosophy, Misc
- Other Academic Areas
- Journals
- Submit material
- More
How Does the Laboratory of the Mind Work?
Dialogue 32 (3):573- (1993)
Abstract
The Laboratory of the Mindwas written with two purposes in mind. The first was to contribute to the growing literature on thought experiments with a selection of the most interesting examples of the genre. The second and much more ambitious purpose was to serve as a “first attempt at a rationalist interpretation of science”.Other Versions
No versions found
My notes
Similar books and articles
REVIEW: James R. Brown, Laboratory of the Mind. [REVIEW]Michael T. Stuart - 2012 - Spontaneous Generations 6 (1):237-241.
Review of The Laboratory of the Mind: Thought Experiments in the Natural Sciences by James Robert Brown. [REVIEW]Gerald J. Massey - 1995 - Philosophy of Science 62 (2):341-343.
Astrid Schwarz: Experiments in Practice.Marcel Boumans - 2015 - Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 46 (1):237-240.
The Laboratory of the Mind: Thought Experiments in the Natural Sciences.James Robert Brown - 1991 - New York: Routledge.
Us, them and it: Modules, genes, environments and evolution.Fiona Cowie - 2008 - Mind and Language 23 (3):284–292.
Poems of Productive Imagination: Thought Experiments, Christianity and Science in Novalis.Yiftach Fehige - 2013 - Neue Zeitschrift für Systematicsche Theologie Und Religionsphilosophie 55 (1):54-83.
The Laboratory of the Mind: Thought Experiments in the Natural Sciences by James Robert Brown. [REVIEW]Gerald Holton - 1993 - Isis 84:836-838.
How Thought Experiments Increase Understanding.Michael T. Stuart - 2017 - In Michael T. Stuart, Yiftach Fehige & James Robert Brown (eds.), The Routledge Companion to Thought Experiments. London: Routledge. pp. 526-544.
Thought Experiments in Philosophy: A Neo-Kantian and Experimentalist Point of View.Marco Buzzoni - 2019 - Topoi 38 (4):771-779.
Analytics
Added to PP
2010-09-25
Downloads
30 (#753,967)
6 months
4 (#1,255,690)
2010-09-25
Downloads
30 (#753,967)
6 months
4 (#1,255,690)
Historical graph of downloads
Citations of this work
Galileo and the indispensability of scientific thought experiment.Tamar Szabó Gendler - 1998 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 49 (3):397-424.
References found in this work
Real People: Personal Identity Without Thought Experiments.Kathleen V. Wilkes - 1988 - Oxford, GB: Oxford University Press.
The semantic tradition from Kant to Carnap: to the Vienna station.Alberto Coffa - 1991 - New York: Cambridge University Press. Edited by Linda Wessels.
How do Scientists Think? Capturing the Dynamics of Conceptual Change in Science.Nancy Nersessian - 1992 - In R. Giere & H. Feigl (eds.), Cognitive Models of Science. University of Minnesota Press. pp. 3--45.
Thought experiments and the epistemology of laws.Roy A. Sorensen - 1992 - Canadian Journal of Philosophy 22 (1):15-44.
Thought Experiments in Science and Philosophy.Tamara Horowitz & Gerald J. Massey (eds.) - 1991 - Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
PhilPapers logo by Andrea Andrews and Meghan Driscoll.
This site uses cookies and Google Analytics (see our terms & conditions for details regarding the privacy implications). Use of this site is subject to terms & conditions.
All rights reserved by The PhilPapers Foundation
Server: philpapers-web-648784bb4d-82spv uwo