Notes
1. Santiago Ramon y Cajal, Advice for a Young Investigator, translated by N. Swanson and L. Swanson (Cambridge: MIT Press; 1999).
2. This book is not about the philosophy of science, and I use philosophical terms from the point of view of a lay consumer of philosophy.
For an in-depth treatment of this material’s online sources, the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (plato.stanford.edu) and the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy offer authoritative essays. Peter Godfrey- Smith’s Theory and Reality (Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 2003) is an excellent introduction to the philosophy of science, and the Oxford Very Short Introduction series, including Samir Okasha’s Philosophy of Science (New York: Oxford University Press; 2016) and Graham Priest’s Logic (New York: Oxford University Press; 2017) provide compact resources.3. Steven Weinberg, “Against Philosophy,” in Dreams of a Final Theory (New York: Pantheon; 1993), pp. 166-190.
4. James Gleick, Genius (London: Little Brown; 1992, Richard Feynman quote, p. 13).
5. Eugene Wigner, “The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Mathematics in the Natural Sciences,” Communications in Pure and Applied Mathematics 13: 1, 1960.
6. Richard Feynman, The Meaning of It All: Thoughts of a Citizen-Scientist (New York: Perseus Books; 1998).
7. Willard V. O. Quine, quoted in Gleick, Genius, p. 371.
8. Larry Laudan, Science and Hypothesis: Historical Essays on Scientific Methodology (Boston: D. Reidel; 1981).
9. Peter Godfrey-Smith, Philosophy of Biology (Princeton: Princeton University Press; 2014).
10. Jordi Cat, “The Unity of Science,” in The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2014 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.). http: plato.stanford.edu, archives, win2014, entries, scientific-unity.
11. Thomas Kuhn, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions (Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 1970).
12. Godfrey-Smith, Philosophy. Godfrey-Smith provides a concise overview of Lakatos’s, Laudan’s, and Feyerabend’s thought vis-a-vis Kuhn in his Chapter 7.
13. Ibid., p. 149.
14. Ibid., p. 176.
15. Nobel Laureates from non-Western countries; visit https:en.wikipedia.org, wiki, List_of_Nobel_laureates.
16. Julian Reiss, Jan Sprenger, “Scientific Objectivity,” in The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2016 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.). http:plato.stanford.edu, archives, sum2016, entries, scientific-objectivity.
17. Lorraine Daston, Peter Galison, Objectivity (New York: Zone Books; 2010, prologue and chapter 1).
18. ibid.,pp. 11-13.
19. ibid., p. 36.
20. Karl Popper, The Logic of Scientific Discovery (New York: Routledge Classics; 2002, p. 22).
21. Sandra Harding, Objectivity and Diversity: Another Logic of Scientific Research (Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 2015, “value-free,” p. 1 and following; “tidy account,” 116). Concern about the view of science as one “tidy account” owes much to philosophies of science, such as Harding's, that advocate for a pluralism of sciences, especially as these relate to interactions at the borderlands between science and social issues.
22. Naomi Oreskes, Erik Conway, Merchants of Doubt: How a Handful of Scientists Obscured the Truth on Issues from Tobacco Smoke to Global Warming (New York: Bloomsbury; 2015).
23. Harding, Objectivity. Defining and analyzing “objectivity” is Harding's central concern.
24. Sandra Harding, “Gender, Democracy, and Philosophy of Science,” http:www. pantaneto.co.uk, issue38, harding.htm.
25. Harding, Objectivity, pp. 34-35.
26. Paul R. Gross, Norman Levitt, Higher Superstition: The Academic Left and Its Quarrels with Science (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press; 1994).
27. Reiss, Sprenger, Scientific Objectivity, ibid.
28. Daniel Dennett, Darwin’s Dangerous Idea (New York: Simon & Schuster; 1995).
29. Stephen W Hawking, Theory of Everything: The Origin and Fate of the Universe (Rutland: Phoenix Books; 2006).
30. Ernst Mayr, Towards a New Philosophy of Biology: Observations of an Evolutionist (Cambridge: Harvard University Press; 1988).
31. https:en.wikipedia.org, wiki, Tinbergen%27s_four_questions
32. Godfrey-Smith, Philosophy, chapter 13; Okasha, Philosophy, chapter 3; James Woodward, “Scientific Explanation,” in The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Winter 2014 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), http:plato.stanford.edu, archives, win2014, entries, scientific-explanation, for introductions to the concept of “explanation.”
33. Gleick, Genius, p. 370.
34. http:dujs.dartmouth.edu, 2013,04, what-causes-ice-to-be-slippery, #.V_pJZ-UrIdU
35. https:www.nasa.gov, mission_pages, juno, main, index.html
36. Allison Gopnik, “Scientific Thinking in Young Children: Theoretical Advances, Empirical Research, and Policy Implications,” Science 337: 1623-1627, 2012.
37. John Tooby, Leda Cosmides, “The Physiological Foundations of Culture,” in The Adapted Mind (New York: Oxford University Press; 1992), pp. 19-136.
38. Steven Pinker, How the Mind Works (New York: W W Norton; 2009).
39. Technically, a valid logical argument can be made starting from false premises, provided that the conclusion must be true. For instance, from the premises “Martians are real” and “the moon is made of cheese,” we can logically conclude that “two plus two equals four,” because that conclusion is true no matter what. Nevertheless, although this argument is valid, it is not sound because the premises are false.
40. Leah Henderson, “The Problem of Induction,” in The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2018 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), https:plato.stanford.edu, archives, sum2018, entries, induction-problem, >.
41. Laudan, Science and Hypothesis.
42. Ibid.
43. Edward Dolnick, The Clockwork Universe: Isaac Newton, the Royal Society, and the Birth of the Modern World (New York: HarperCollins; 2011).
44. Laudan, Science and Hypothesis.
45. Richard Westfall, Never at Rest: A Biography of Isaac Newton (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1980).
The astronomer and mathematician Johannes Kepler, working from the precise astronomical measurements of Tycho Brahe, had figured out, among other things, that the planets traveled around the sun in elliptical orbits, but he had no idea why they would do that. Newton's contribution was to postulate a force acting on all of the bodies in the universe—gravity—that fell off as the inverse square of the distance from a body. Interestingly, his laws were just a mathematical description of what was happening; Newton refused to speculate on the nature of the force. Newton proved that his law of gravity predicted elliptical planetary orbits; however, his reasoning did not use enumerative induction.46. Gleick, Genius, p. 367; Richard Feynman, The Very Best of the Feynman Lectures (Pasadena: California Institute of Technology; 2005). See also A. Loeb, “Good Data Are Not Enough,” Nature 59: 2-25, 2016, http:www.nature.com, news, good-data- are-not-enough-1.20906, for interesting details of the Mayans' accomplishments. This comment makes strong arguments in favor of smaller research groups, multiple competing points of view, and hypothesis testing in research.
47. David Hume, A Treatise of Human Nature, reprinted with an Introduction by D. G. C. Macnabb (New York: Meridian Books; 1740, 1969).
48. Ibid.
49. “The despair of philosophy”: Alfred Whitehead, quoted in http:,philsci-archive.pitt. edu, 13057, 1, USM_Induction2017.pdf.
50. Bertrand Russell, A History of Western Philosophy (New York: Simon & Schuster; 1945).
51. Okasha, Philosophy, chapter 2.
52. Ibid., pp. 24-29.
53. https:www.youtube.com, watch?v=pizFsY0yjss; https:consumerist.com, 2016, 06, 27, hp-and-sony-recall-laptop-batteries-due-to-possible-overheating-and-fires.
54. Henderson, “Problem of Induction.”
55. Godfrey-Smith, Philosophy, chapter 3.
56. https:www.youtube.com, watch?v=pizFsY0yjss; https:consumerist.com, 2016, 06, 27, hp-and-sony-recall-laptop-batteries-due-to-possible-overheating-and-fires.
57. Okasha, Philosophy, pp. 24-29.
58. Godfrey-Smith, Philosophy, chapter 3.
59. Ronald W Clark, Einstein: The Life and Times (New York: Avon Books; 1971).
60. Hume, A Treatise of Human Nature.
61. Godfrey-Smith, Philosophy, chapter 3.