ARTICLE
Aesthetic values in science
Milena Ivanova,
Corresponding Author
Milena Ivanova
University of Queensland
Correspondence
Milena Ivanova, School of Historical and Philosophical Inquiry, University of Queensland. Australia.
Email: [email protected]
Search for more papers by this authorMilena Ivanova,
Corresponding Author
Milena Ivanova
University of Queensland
Correspondence
Milena Ivanova, School of Historical and Philosophical Inquiry, University of Queensland. Australia.
Email: [email protected]
Search for more papers by this authorAbstract
Scientists often use aesthetic values in the evaluation and choice of theories. Aesthetic values are not only regarded as leading to practically more useful theories but are often taken to stand in a special epistemic relation to the truth of a theory such that the aesthetic merit of a theory is evidence of its truth. This paper explores what aesthetic considerations influence scientists' reasoning, how such aesthetic values relate to the utility of a scientific theory, and how one can justify the epistemic role for such values. The paper examines ways in which the link between beauty and truth can be defended, the challenges facing such accounts, and explores alternative epistemic roles for aesthetic values in scientific practice.
WORKS CITED
- Bird, A. (2007). What is scientific progress? Noûs, 41, 64–89.
- Breitenbach, A. (2013). Aesthetics in science: A Kantian proposal. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, CXIII, 83–100.
10.1111/j.1467-9264.2013.00346.x Google Scholar
- Cellucci, C. (2015). Mathematical beauty, understanding, and discovery. Foundations of Science, 20, 339–355.
- Chakravartty, A. (2007). A metaphysics for scientific realism: Knowing the unobservable. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
10.1017/CBO9780511487354 Google Scholar
- Chandrasekhar, S. (1987). Truth and beauty: Aesthetics and motivation in science. Chicago:The University of Chicago Press.
10.7208/chicago/9780226162775.001.0001 Google Scholar
- Cutting, J. (2003). Gustave Caillebotte, French impressionism, and mere exposure. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 10, 319–343.
- De Regt, H. (2004). Making sense of understanding. Philosophy of Science, 71, 98–109.
- De Regt, H. (2015). Scientific understanding: Truth or dare? Synthese, 192, 3781–3797.
- Dirac, P. A. M. (1980). The excellence of Einstein's theory of gravitation. In M. In, M. Goldsmith, A. Mackay, & J. Woudhuysen (Eds.), Einstein: The first hundred years. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
10.1016/B978-0-08-025019-9.50013-X Google Scholar
- Duhem, P. (1954[1906]). The aim and structure of physical theory. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
10.1515/9780691233857 Google Scholar
- Dyson, F.J. (1987) Paul Dirac. Obituary Notice, American Philosophical Society Yearbook for 1986, 100-5.
- Elgin, C. (1991). Understanding: Art and science. In P. French, T. Uehling, & H. Wettstein (Eds.), Philosophy in the arts, midwest studies in philosophy. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.
10.1111/j.1475-4975.1991.tb00239.x Google Scholar
- Elgin, C. (2009). Is understanding factive? In D. Prichard, A. Millar, & A. Haddock (Eds.), Epistemic value. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
- Engler, G. (1990). Aesthetics in science and art. British Journal of Aesthetics, 30, 24–33.
- Engler, G. (2002). Einstein and the most beautiful theories in physics. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 16, 27–37.
10.1080/02698590120118800 Google Scholar
- French, S. (2003). A model-theoretic account of representation (or, I don't know much about art … but I know it involves isomorphism). Philosophy of Science, 70, 1472–1483.
- French, S. (2014). The structure of the world: Metaphysics and representation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199684847.001.0001 Google Scholar
- Friedman, M. (1974). Explanation and scientific understanding. Journal of Philosophy, 71, 5–19.
10.2307/2024924 Google Scholar
- R. Frigg, & M. Hunter (Eds) (2010). Beyond mimesis and convention. Boston studies in the philosophy of science (Vol. 262). Dordrecht: Springer.
10.1007/978-90-481-3851-7 Google Scholar
- B. Gaut, & D. M. Lopes (Eds) (2013). The Routledge companion to aesthetics ( 3rd ed.). New York: Routledge.
10.4324/9780203813034 Google Scholar
- Greene, B. (1999). The elegant universe. New York: W.W. Norton and Company.
- Grimm, S. R. (2006). Is understanding a species of knowledge? British Journal for Philosophy of Science, 57, 515–535.
- Heisenberg, W. (1971). Physics and Beyond: Encounters and Conversations. Translated by Arnold J. Pomerans. London: George Allen and Unwin.
- Holmes, F. (1996). Beautiful experiments in the life sciences. In A. I. Tauber (Ed.), The elusive synthesis: Aesthetics and science (pp. 83–101). Dordrecht: Kluwer.
10.1007/978-94-009-1786-6_4 Google Scholar
- Holmes, F. (2001). Stahl, and the replication of DNA: A history of "The Most Beautiful Experiment in Biology". New Haven: Yale University Publishing.
10.12987/yale/9780300085402.001.0001 Google Scholar
- Ivanova, M. (2010). Pierre Duhem's good sense as a guide to theory choice. Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science, 41, 58–64.
- Ivanova, M. (2014). Is there a place for epistemic virtues in theory choice? In A. Fairweather (Ed.), Virtue Epistemology Naturalized, Synthese Library, 366, 207–226.
10.1007/978-3-319-04672-3_13 Google Scholar
- Ivanova, M. (2015). Conventionalism about what? Where Duhem and Poincaré part ways. Studies in the History and Philosophy of Science, 54, 80–89.
- Ivanova, M. (2016, online) Poincaré's aesthetics of science. Synthese. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-016-1069-1
- Kitcher, P. (1981). Explanatory unification. Philosophy of Science, 48, 507–531.
- Kitcher, P. (2002). Scientific knowledge. In P. Moser (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of epistemology (pp. 385–408). New York: Oxford University Press.
10.1093/0195130057.003.0014 Google Scholar
- Kivy, P. (1991). Science and aesthetic appreciation. Midwest Studies in Philosophy, 26, 180–195.
10.1111/j.1475-4975.1991.tb00238.x Google Scholar
- Kosso, P. (2002). The omnisienter: Beauty and scientific understanding. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 16, 39–48.
10.1080/02698590120118819 Google Scholar
- Kuhn, T. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
- Kuipers, T. (2002). Beauty, a road to the truth. Synthese, 131, 291–328.
- Lipton, P. (2004). Inference to the best explanation ( 2nd ed.). London: Routledge.
- Livingston, P. (2009). Poincaré's delicate sieve: On creativity and constraints in the arts. In M. Krausz, D. Dutton, & K. Bardsley (Eds.), The idea of creativity. Leiden: Brill.
- Mach, E. (1984). The analysis of sensations and the relation of the physical to the psychical. Trans. by C. M. Williams. La Salle: Open Court.
- McAllister, J. (1996). Beauty and revolution in science. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
- McAllister, J. (2005). Mathematical beauty and the evolution of the standards of mathematical proof. In M. Emmer (Ed.), The visual mind I (pp. 15–34). Cambridge: The MIT Press.
- Meskin, A., Phelan, M., Moore, M., & Kieran, M. (2013). Mere exposure to bad art. British Journal of Aesthetics, 53, 139–164.
- Mizrahi, M. (2012). Idealizations and scientific understanding. Philosophical Studies, 160, 237–252.
- Montano, U. (2014). Explaining beauty in mathematics: An aesthetic theory of mathematics. Synthese Library, 370, 220.
- O'Malley, M. A., Wideman, J. G., & Ruiz-Trillo, I. (2016). Losing complexity: The role of simplification in macroevolution. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 31, 608–621.
- Parsons, G., & Reuger, A. (2000). The epistemic significance of appreciating experiments aesthetically. British Journal of Aesthetics, 40, 407–423.
- Poincaré, H. (2001). Science and Hypothesis. In S. Gould (Ed.), The value of science: essential writings of Henri Poincaré. New York: Modern Library.
- Reichenbach, H. (1947). Elements of symbolic logic. New York: Macmillan.
- Reuger, A. (1997). Experiments, nature and aesthetic experience in the eitheenth century. British Journal of Aesthetics, 37, 305–322.
- Strevens, M. (2013). No understanding without explanation. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 44, 510–515.
- Stump, D. (2007). Pierre Duhem's virtue epistemology. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 38, 149–159.
- Thuan, T. (2001). Chaos and harmony: Perspectives on scientific revolutions of the twentieth century. New York: Oxford University Press.
- Todd, C. S. (2008). Unmasking the truth beneath the beauty. Why the supposed aesthetic judgments made in science may not be aesthetic at all. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 22, 61–79.
10.1080/02698590802280910 Google Scholar
- Toon, A. (2015). Where is the understanding? Synthese, 192, 3859–3875.
- Van Fraassen, B. (2008). Scientific representation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199278220.001.0001 Google Scholar
- von Neumann, J. (1961). The mathematician. In J. R. Newman (Ed.), The world of mathematics (Vol. IV) (pp. 2053–2063). New York: Simon & Schuster.
- Watson, J. D. (1968). The double helix: A personal account of the discovery of the structure of DNA. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson.
- Zee, A. (1999). Fearful symmetry: The search for beauty in modern physics. Princeton University Press: Princeton.
- Zeki, S., Romaya, J. P., Benincasa, D. M. T., & Atiyah, M. F. (2014). The experience of mathematical beauty and its neural correlates. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 8, 1–12.
