Jamie ShawLeibniz Universität Hannover · Institute of Philosophy
Jamie Shaw
Doctor of Philosophy
About
47
Publications
10,641
Reads
How we measure 'reads'
A 'read' is counted each time someone views a publication summary (such as the title, abstract, and list of authors), clicks on a figure, or views or downloads the full-text. Learn more
225
Citations
Introduction
My primary interests lie in methodological and political issues in science funding policy. I am interested in debates about the structure of reasoning in peer review, the 'freedom of science', and debates about differing funding allocation methods. I approach these topics from a philosophical perspective. I also work in the history of philosophy of science, especially focusing on the works of Paul Feyerabend, and have side interests in numerous topics within other branches of philosophy.
Publications
Publications (47)
The paper presents the transcript of the discussions during the first scientonomy workshop that took place on February 25, 2023. The participants discussed and voted on several modifications concerning the scientonomic workflow (Sciento-2019-0007, Sciento-2019-0001, Sciento-2019-0002, Sciento-2019-0003, Sciento-2019-0004, Sciento-2019-0005, Sciento...
Recent science funding policy scholars and practitioners have advocated for the use of lotteries, or elements of random chance, as supplementations of traditional peer review for evaluating grant applications. One of the primary motivations for lotteries is their purported openness to innovative research. The purpose of this paper is to argue that...
Feyerabend famously labels his view in Against Method ‘epistemological anarchism.’ He arrives at this view from engaging with scientific practice and its history. Here, he is keen to distinguish between epistemological anarchism from political anarchism and even casts doubt on the latter. The purpose of this paper is contrast thought on political a...
Despite its age, Vannevar Bushs Science: The Endless Frontier has remained a touchstone for science funding policy discussions. More specifically, many claim that Bush ushered in a new ‘social contract’ that allowed scientists to freely choose projects in accordance with their own interests while promising deliverables for the society that funds sc...
Despite the surging interest in introducing lottery mechanisms into decision-making procedures for science funding bodies, the discourse on funding-by-lottery remains underdeveloped and, at times, misleading. Funding-by-lottery is sometimes presented as if it were a single mechanism when, in reality, there are many funding-by-lottery mechanisms wit...
Despite the surging interest in introducing lottery mechanisms into decision making procedures for science funding bodies, the discourse on funding-by-lottery remains underdeveloped and, at times, misleading. Funding-by-lottery is sometimes presented as if it were a single mechanism when, in reality, there are many funding-by-lottery mechanisms wit...
Science funding policy is constantly evolving as a result of geopolitical, technological, cultural, social, and economic shifts. The last major upheaval of science funding policy happened in response to a catastrophic series of events: World War II. The newest worldwide catastrophe, the COVID-19 pandemic, has prompted similar reflections on fundame...
Recent philosophical literature has turned its attention towards assessments of how to judge scientific proposals as worthy of further inquiry. Previous work, as well as papers contained within this special issue, propose criteria for pursuitworthiness (Achinstein, 1993; Whitt, 1992; DiMarco & Khalifa, 2019; Laudan, 1977; Shan, 2020; Šešelja et al....
There has been a resurgence between two closely related discussions concerning modern science funding policy. The first revolves around the coherence and usefulness of the distinction between basic and applied science and the second concerns whether science should be free to pursue research according to its own internal standards or pursue socially...
Many have struggled to identify the proper way(s) that normative philosophical claims about science can benefit from history. The primary worry here has been that deriving philosophical 'oughts' from historical facts would commit the naturalistic fallacy (Schickore, 2011). The task of this paper is to introduce a novel solution to this problem. Spe...
This paper presents a diagrammatic notation for visualizing epistemic entities and relations. The notation was created during the Visualizing Worldviews project funded by the University of Toronto’s Jackman Humanities Institute and has been further developed by the scholars participating in the university’s Research Opportunity Program. Since any s...
In Feyerabend's early works, some of which remain unpublished, he solidifies his commitment to a meta-philosophical naturalism. This naturalism remains the unspoken backbone of Feyerabend's mature works, though he only gradually realizes its implications for the study of scientific methodology. The purpose of this paper is to uncover the roots of F...
Feyerabend is infamous for his defense of pluralism, which he extends to every topic he discusses. Disagreement, a by-product of this pluralism, becomes a sign of flourishing critical communities. In Feyerabend’s political works, he extends this pluralism from science to democratic societies and incorporates his earlier work on scientific methodolo...
From the 1970s onwards, Feyerabend argues against the freedom of science. This will seem strange to some, as his epistemological anarchism is often taken to suggest that scientists should be free of even the most basic and obvious norms of science. His argument against the freedom of science is heavily influenced by his case study of the interferen...
This collection of new essays interprets and critically evaluates the philosophy of Paul Feyerabend. It offers innovative historical scholarship on Feyerabend's take on topics such as realism, empiricism, mimesis, voluntarism, pluralism, materialism, and the mind-body problem, as well as certain debates in the philosophy of physics. It also conside...
This collection of new essays interprets and critically evaluates the philosophy of Paul Feyerabend. It offers innovative historical scholarship on Feyerabend's take on topics such as realism, empiricism, mimesis, voluntarism, pluralism, materialism, and the mind-body problem, as well as certain debates in the philosophy of physics. It also conside...
The emerging consensus in the secondary literature on Duhem is that his notion of ‘good sense’ is a virtue of individual scientists that guides them choosie between empirically equal rival theories (Stump 2007 Stump, D. 2007. “Pierre Duhem’s Virtue Epistemology.” Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 38: 149–159.[Crossref], [Web of Sc...
To anyone vaguely aware of Feyerabend, the title of this paper would appear as an oxymoron. For Feyerabend, it is often thought, science is an anarchic practice with no discernible structure. Against this trend, I elaborate the groundwork that Feyerabend has provided for the beginnings of an approach to organizing scientific research. Specifically,...
Most contemporary philosophers of mind cite Feyerabend as an early proponent of eliminative materialism, or the thesis that there are no mental processes. This attribution, I argue, is incorrect. Rather, Feyerabend only showed that common objections against materialism presuppose problematic meta-philosophical commitments. In this paper, I show how...
While the scientonomic workflow guiding the development of a general theory of scientific change has been practiced for nearly four years, it has yet to be formally evaluated. The goal of this paper is to fill this gap with a critical appraisal of the practice and theoretical underpinnings of the workflow currently used in scientonomy. First, we co...
Well-known epistemologies of science have implications for how best to understand knowledge transfer (KT). Yet, to date, no serious attempt has been made to explicate these particular implications. This paper infers views about KT from two popular epistemologies; what we characterize as incommensurabilitist views (after Devitt 2001; Bird 2002, 2008...
There has been a great deal of skepticism towards the value of the realism/anti-realism debate. More specifically, many have argued that plausible formulations of realism and anti-realism do not differ substantially in any way (Fine 1986; Stein 1989; Blackburn 2002). In this paper, I argue against this trend by demonstrating how a hypothetical reso...
In this paper, we demonstrate how a systematic taxonomy of stances can help elucidate two classic debates of the historical turn—the Lakatos–Feyerabend debate concerning theory rejection and the Feyerabend–Kuhn debate about pluralism during normal science. We contend that Kuhn, Feyerabend, and Lakatos were often talking at cross-purposes due to the...
The near consensus in the secondary literature on Feyerabend is that his epistemological anarchism, characterized by the slogan ‘anything goes’, was not a positive proposal but the conclusion of a reductio argument against his opponents (Lloyd 1997; Staley 1999; Munévar 2000; Farrell 2003; Tsou 2003; Oberheim 2006; Roe 2009). This makes anarchism a...
Quantum Ontology: A Guide to the Metaphysics of Quantum Mechanics LEWIS PETER J. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016; 207 pp.; $35.00 (paperback) - JAMIE SHAW
While many philosophers speak of ‘pluralism’ within philosophy of biology, there has been little said about what such pluralism amounts to or what its underlying assumptions are. This has provoked so me anxiety about whether pluralism is compatible with their commitment to naturalism (Cussins 1992). This paper surveys three prominent pluralist posi...
The Realistic Empiricism of Mach, James, and Russell: Neutral Monism Reconceived BANKS ERIC C. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014; 217 pp.; $95.00 (hardback) - JAMIE SHAW