Journal Articles by Yafeng Shan
Philosophy Compass, 2024
Among biologists and philosophers, there is an ongoing debate over the Modern Synthesis and the E... more Among biologists and philosophers, there is an ongoing debate over the Modern Synthesis and the Extended Evolutionary Synthesis. Some argue that our current evolutionary biology is in need of (at least) some substan-This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Asian Journal of Philosophy, 2023
Bird's new book, Knowing Science, provides an exemplar of how to do epistemology and philosophy o... more Bird's new book, Knowing Science, provides an exemplar of how to do epistemology and philosophy of science together. While I wholeheartedly appreciate his attempt to bridge the gap between epistemology and philosophy of science and find his project promising, I am not convinced by the central thesis of the book that knowledge plays a central role in science. In this article, I focus on Bird's epistemic account of scientific progress, which is the view that the nature of scientific progress is the accumulation of scientific knowledge. Contra Bird, I argue that scientific progress cannot be fully characterised as the accumulation of scientific knowledge.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 2023
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Synthese, 2022
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Synthese, 2022
Social scientists often draw on a variety of evidence for their causal inferences. There is also ... more Social scientists often draw on a variety of evidence for their causal inferences. There is also a call to use a greater variety of evidence in social science research. This topical collection examines the philosophical foundations and implications of evidential diversity in the social sciences. It assesses the application of Evidential Pluralism in the context of the social sciences, especially its application to economics and political science. It also discusses the concept of causation in cognitive science and the implications of evidential diversity for the social sciences.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Metaphilosophy, 2022
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Philosophy Compass, 2022
This paper provides a critical review of the debate over the philosophical foundations of mixed m... more This paper provides a critical review of the debate over the philosophical foundations of mixed methods research and examines the notion of philosophical foundations. It distinguishes axiology-oriented from ontology-oriented philosophical foundations. It also identifies three different senses of philosophical foundations of mixed methods research. The weak sense of philosophical foundations (e.g., pragmatism) merely allows the possibility of the integration of both quantitative and qualitative methods/data/designs. The moderate sense of philosophical foundations (e.g., transformativism) provide a good reason to use mixed methods in (at least some) social scientific research. The strong sense of philosophical foundations (e.g., dialectical pluralism) justifies a normative thesis that mixed methods research should be encouraged in (at least some) social scientific research.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Metaphilosophy, 2022
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
European Journal for Philosophy of Science, 2021
Evidential Pluralism maintains that in order to establish a causal claim one normally needs to es... more Evidential Pluralism maintains that in order to establish a causal claim one normally needs to establish the existence of an appropriate conditional correlation and the existence of an appropriate mechanism complex, so when assessing a causal claim one ought to consider both association studies and mechanistic studies. Hitherto, Evidential Pluralism has been applied to medicine, leading to the EBM+ programme, which recommends that evidence-based medicine should systematically evaluate mechanistic studies alongside clinical studies. This paper argues that Evidential Pluralism can also be fruitfully applied to the social sciences. In particular, Evidential Pluralism provides (i) a new approach to evidence-based policy; (ii) a new account of the evidential relationships in more theoretical research; and (iii) new philosophical motivation for mixed methods research. The application of Evidential Pluralism to the social sciences is also defended against two objections.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A, 2021
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Philosophy of Science, 2019
This article develops and defends a new functional approach to scientific progress. I begin with ... more This article develops and defends a new functional approach to scientific progress. I begin with a review of the problems of the traditional functional approach. Then I propose a new functional account of scientific progress, in which scientific progress is defined in terms of usefulness of problem defining and problem solving. I illustrate and defend my account by applying it to the history of genetics. Finally, I highlight the advantages of my new functional approach over the epistemic and semantic approaches and dismiss some potential objections to my approach.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Metaphilosophy, 2022
Philosophical progress is one of the most controversial topics in metaphilosophy. It has been wid... more Philosophical progress is one of the most controversial topics in metaphilosophy. It has been widely debated whether philosophy makes any progress in history. This paper revisits the concept of philosophical progress. It first identifies two criteria of an ideal concept of philosophical progress. It then argues that our accounts of philosophical progress fail to provide such an ideal concept. Finally, it argues that not only do we not have a good concept of philosophical progress, we also do not need a concept of philosophical progress in order to arrive at a good understanding of the history of philosophy.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
European Journal for Philosophy of Science, 2021
Evidential Pluralism maintains that in order to establish a causal claim one normally needs to es... more Evidential Pluralism maintains that in order to establish a causal claim one normally needs to establish the existence of an appropriate conditional correlation and the existence of an appropriate mechanism complex, so when assessing a causal claim one ought to consider both association studies and mechanistic studies. Hitherto, Evidential Pluralism has been applied to medicine, leading to the EBM+ programme, which recommends that evidence-based medicine should systematically evaluate mechanistic studies alongside clinical studies. This paper argues that Evidential Pluralism can also be fruitfully applied to the social sciences. In particular, Evidential Pluralism provides (i) a new approach to evidence-based policy; (ii) an account of the evidential relationships in more theoretical research; and (iii) new philosophical motivation for mixed methods research. The application of Evidential Pluralism to the social sciences is also defended against two objections.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Metaphilosophy, 2022
Recently there has been an increasing interest in metaphilosphy. The aim of philosophy has been e... more Recently there has been an increasing interest in metaphilosphy. The aim of philosophy has been examined. The development of philosophy has also been scrutinised. With the development of new approaches and methods, new problems arise. This collection revisits some of the metaphilosophical issues, including philosophical progress and the aim of philosophy. It sheds new light on some old approaches, such as naturalism and ordinary language philosophy. It also explores new philosophical methods (e.g., digital philosophy of science, conceptual engineering, and the practice-based approach to logic) and their prospects.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Philosophy Compass, 2019
The nature of scientific explanation is controversial. Some maintain that all scientific explanat... more The nature of scientific explanation is controversial. Some maintain that all scientific explanations have to be contrastive in nature. (Contrastivism) However, others argue that no scientific explanation is genuinely contrastive. (Non-contrastivism) In addition, a compatibilist view is developed. It is argued that the debate between contrastivism and non-contrastivism is merely a linguistic dispute rather than a genuine disagreement on the nature of scientific explanation. Scientific explanations are both contrastive and non-contrastive in some sense. (Compatibilism) This paper examines the debate between contrastivism and non-contrastivism in scientific explanation. It begins with a critical review of the arguments for contrastivism, non-contrastivism, and compatibilism, and concludes with some remarks on the prospect of the issue.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Philosophy Compass, 2022
This paper provides a critical review of the debate over philosophical foundations of mixed metho... more This paper provides a critical review of the debate over philosophical foundations of mixed methods research and examines the notion of philosophical foundations. It distinguishes axiology-oriented from ontology-oriented philosophical foundations. It also identifies three different senses of philosophical foundations of mixed methods research. The weak sense of philosophical foundations (e.g. pragmatism) merely allows the possibility of the integration of both quantitative and qualitative methods/data/designs. The moderate sense of philosophical foundations (e.g. transformativism) provide a good reason to use mixed methods in (at least some) social scientific research. The strong sense of philosophical foundations (e.g. dialectical pluralism) justifies a normative thesis that mixed methods research should be encouraged in (at least some) social scientific research.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Synthese, 2020
Alexander Bird indicates that the significance of Thomas Kuhn in the history of philosophy of sci... more Alexander Bird indicates that the significance of Thomas Kuhn in the history of philosophy of science is somehow paradoxical. On the one hand, Kuhn was one of the most influential and important philosophers of science in the second half of the twentieth century. On the other hand, nowadays there is little distinctively Kuhn’s legacy in the sense that most of Kuhn’s work has no longer any philosophical significance. Bird argues that the explanation of the paradox of Kuhn’s legacy is that Kuhn took a direction opposite to that of the mainstream of the philosophy of science in his later academic career. This paper aims to provide a new way to understand and develop Kuhn’s legacy by revisiting the development of Kuhn’s philosophy of science in 1970s and proposing a new account of exemplar. Firstly, I propose my diagnosis of Kuhn’s “wrong turning” by identifying Kuhn’s two novel contributions: the introduction of paradigm and the proposal of the incommensurability thesis. Secondly, I argue that Kuhn made a conceptual/terminological turn from paradigm to theory, which undermined Kuhn’s novel contributions. Thirdly, I propose a new articulation of exemplar and propose an exemplar-based approach to analysing the history of science. Finally, I show how the exemplar-based approach can be applied to analyse the history of science by my case study of the early development of genetics.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Metaphilosophy, 2022
Philosophical progress is one of the most controversial topics in metaphilosophy. It has been wid... more Philosophical progress is one of the most controversial topics in metaphilosophy. It has been widely debated whether philosophy makes any progress in history. This paper revisits the concept of philosophical progress. It first identifies two criteria of an ideal concept of philosophical progress. It then argues that our accounts of philosophical progress fail to provide such an ideal concept. Finally, it argues that not only do we not have a good concept of philosophical progress, we also do not need a concept of philosophical progress in order to arrive at a good understanding of the history of philosophy.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Philosophy Compass, 2019
The nature of scientific explanation is controversial. Some maintain that all scientific explanat... more The nature of scientific explanation is controversial. Some maintain that all scientific explanations have to be contrastive in nature. (Contrastivism) However, others argue that no scientific explanation is genuinely contrastive. (Non-contrastivism) In addition, a compatibilist view is developed. It is argued that the debate between contrastivism and non-contrastivism is merely a linguistic dispute rather than a genuine disagreement on the nature of scientific explanation. Scientific explanations are both contrastive and non-contrastive in some sense. (Compatibilism) This paper examines the debate between contrastivism and non-contrastivism in scientific explanation. It begins with a critical review of the arguments for contrastivism, non-contrastivism, and compatibilism, and concludes with some remarks on the prospect of the issue.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
European Journal for Philosophy of Science, 2021
Evidential Pluralism maintains that in order to establish a causal claim one normally needs to es... more Evidential Pluralism maintains that in order to establish a causal claim one normally needs to establish the existence of an appropriate conditional correlation and the existence of an appropriate mechanism complex, so when assessing a causal claim one ought to consider both association studies and mechanistic studies. Hitherto, Evidential Pluralism has been applied to medicine, leading to the EBM+ programme, which recommends that evidence-based medicine should systematically evaluate mechanistic studies alongside clinical studies. This paper argues that Evidential Pluralism can also be fruitfully applied to the social sciences. In particular, Evidential Pluralism provides (i) a new approach to evidence-based policy; (ii) an account of the evidential relationships in more theoretical research; and (iii) new philosophical motivation for mixed methods research. The application of Evidential Pluralism to the social sciences is also defended against two objections.
Bookmarks Related papers MentionsView impact
Uploads
Journal Articles by Yafeng Shan
It offers new defences of the seven main approaches to mixed methods (the pragmatist approach, the transformative approach, the indigenous approach, the dialectical approach, the dialectical pluralist approach, the performative approach, and the realist approach) written by leading mixed methods researchers. Each approach is accompanied by critical reflections chapter from philosophers’ point of view. The book shows the value of the use of mixed methods from a philosophical point of view, and offers a systematic and critical examination of these positions and approaches from a philosophical point of view. The volume also offers a platform to promote a dialogue between mixed methods researchers and philosophers of science, and provides foundations for further research and teaching of this hotly debated topic.
This volume is ideal for researchers and advanced students, and anyone who is interested in research methods and the social sciences more generally.
Traditionally, debates concerning scientific progress have focused on different methodological approaches, notably the epistemic and semantic approaches. The chapters in Part I of the book defend these two traditional approaches, as well as the newly revived functional and newly developed understanding-based approaches. Part II features in-depth case studies of scientific progress from the history of science. The chapters cover individual sciences including physics, chemistry, evolutionary biology, seismology, psychology, sociology, economics, and medicine. Finally, Part III of the book explores important issues from contemporary philosophy of science. These chapters address the implications of scientific progress for the scientific realism/anti-realism debate, incommensurability, values in science, idealisation, scientific speculation, interdisciplinarity, and scientific perspectivalism.
New Philosophical Perspectives on Scientific Progress will be of interest to researchers and advanced students working on the history and philosophy of science.