profile-cover
Drag to reposition
profile picture

Michael T. Stuart

University of York
  •  Home
  •  Publications
    64
    • Most Recent
    • Most Downloaded
    • Topics
  •  Recommended
    5
  •  Events
    9
  •  News and Updates
    46

 More details
  • University of York
    Department of Philosophy
    Lecturer
University of Toronto, St. George Campus
Institute for the History and Philosophy of Science
PhD, 2015
Email (login required)
Homepage
Heslington, York, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland
0000-0002-4165-2641
Areas of Specialization
Understanding
Theories of Imagination
Explanation in the Sciences
Varieties of Explanation
Theories of Explanation
Explanation
Conceivability, Imagination, and Possibility
Thought Experiments
Imaginative Resistance
Experimental Philosophy
Intuition
History of Physics
7 more
Areas of Interest
Understanding
Theories of Imagination
Explanation in the Sciences
Varieties of Explanation
Theories of Explanation
History of Biology
Explanation
Conceivability, Imagination, and Possibility
Thought Experiments
Experimental Philosophy
Evidence and Knowledge
Intuition
Imaginative Resistance
General Philosophy of Science
History of Physics
10 more
PhilPapers Editorships
Artificial Intelligence in Science
Scientific Imagination
  • All publications (64)
  •  168
    Katerina Ierodiakonou and Sophie Roux, eds. Thought Experiments in Methodological and Historical Contexts. Leiden: Brill, 2011. Pp. vii+233. €99.00 (review)
    with James Robert Brown
    Hopos: The Journal of the International Society for the History of Philosophy of Science 3 (1): 154-157. 2013.
    Thought ExperimentsHistory of Western Philosophy, MiscScientific Practice, MiscGeneral Philosophy of…Read more
    Thought ExperimentsHistory of Western Philosophy, MiscScientific Practice, MiscGeneral Philosophy of Science, MiscScientific DiscoveryHistory of Science, MiscExperimentation in ScienceScientific Imagination
  •  140
    Norton and the Logic of Thought Experiments
    Axiomathes 26 (4): 451-466. 2016.
    John D. Norton defends an empiricist epistemology of thought experiments, the central thesis of which is that thought experiments are nothing more than arguments. Philosophers have attempted to provide counterexamples to this claim, but they haven’t convinced Norton. I will point out a more fundamental reason for reformulation that criticizes Norton’s claim that a thought experiment is a good one when its underlying logical form possesses certain desirable properties. I argue that by Norton’s em…Read more
    John D. Norton defends an empiricist epistemology of thought experiments, the central thesis of which is that thought experiments are nothing more than arguments. Philosophers have attempted to provide counterexamples to this claim, but they haven’t convinced Norton. I will point out a more fundamental reason for reformulation that criticizes Norton’s claim that a thought experiment is a good one when its underlying logical form possesses certain desirable properties. I argue that by Norton’s empiricist standards, no thought experiment is ever justified in any deep sense due to the properties of its logical form. Instead, empiricists should consider again the merits of evaluating thought experiments more like laboratory experiments, and less like arguments.
    Evidence and KnowledgeScientific Method, MiscellaneousEpistemology, MiscGeneral Philosophy of Scienc…Read more
    Evidence and KnowledgeScientific Method, MiscellaneousEpistemology, MiscGeneral Philosophy of Science, Misc
  •  154
    Introduction to Special Issue of Perspectives on Science
    with Yiftach Fehige
    Perspectives on Science 22 (2): 167-178. 2014.
    This is an introduction to a special issue of Perspectives on Science, the outcome of a workshop entitled "Thought Experiments in Science: Four Blind Spots," held at the University of Toronto, March 23rd, 2012. The recent revival in philosophical study of thought experiments has been limited to fields like epistemology, science studies, and metaphilosophy. With this issue we hope to facilitate a discussion about how some other disciplinary perspectives might bear on the subject; specifically, th…Read more
    This is an introduction to a special issue of Perspectives on Science, the outcome of a workshop entitled "Thought Experiments in Science: Four Blind Spots," held at the University of Toronto, March 23rd, 2012. The recent revival in philosophical study of thought experiments has been limited to fields like epistemology, science studies, and metaphilosophy. With this issue we hope to facilitate a discussion about how some other disciplinary perspectives might bear on the subject; specifically, the history of philosophy, literary studies, phenomenology and cognitive science.
    Science, Logic, and MathematicsThought ExperimentsPhilosophical Methods, MiscHistory of Western Phil…Read more
    Science, Logic, and MathematicsThought ExperimentsPhilosophical Methods, MiscHistory of Western Philosophy, MiscPhenomenology, MiscRationality and Cognitive Science
  •  1396
    REVIEW: James R. Brown, Laboratory of the Mind (review)
    Spontaneous Generations 6 (1): 237-241. 2012.
    Originally published in 1991, The Laboratory of the Mind: Thought Experiments in the Natural Sciences, is the first monograph to identify and address some of the many interesting questions that pertain to thought experiments. While the putative aim of the book is to explore the nature of thought experimental evidence, it has another important purpose which concerns the crucial role thought experiments play in Brown’s Platonic master argument.In that argument, Brown argues against naturalism and …Read more
    Originally published in 1991, The Laboratory of the Mind: Thought Experiments in the Natural Sciences, is the first monograph to identify and address some of the many interesting questions that pertain to thought experiments. While the putative aim of the book is to explore the nature of thought experimental evidence, it has another important purpose which concerns the crucial role thought experiments play in Brown’s Platonic master argument.In that argument, Brown argues against naturalism and empiricism (Brown 2012), for mathematical Platonism (Brown 2008), and from the Platonist-friendly, abstract universals posited by the Dretske-Tooley-Armstrong (DTA) account of the laws of nature to a more general, physical Platonism. The Laboratory of the Mind is where he takes this final step.
    Scientific PracticeThought ExperimentsPhilosophical Methods, MiscRationalism, Misc
  • Prev.
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • Next
PhilPeople logo

On this site

  • Find a philosopher
  • Find a department
  • The Radar
  • Index of professional philosophers
  • Index of departments
  • Help
  • Acknowledgments
  • Careers
  • Contact us
  • Terms and conditions

Brought to you by

  • The PhilPapers Foundation
  • The American Philosophical Association
  • Centre for Digital Philosophy, Western University