Nicola Mößner

Fotografien können als paradigmatische Instanzen des Bildbegriffs aufgefasst werden. Sie finden umfangreiche Verwendung in den Wissenschaften. Die kausale Relation zum abgebildeten Objekt sowie die vermeintliche Ähnlichkeit des Bildes mit seinem Gegenstand scheinen ihren Gebrauch als Belege im Forschungsprozess zu legitimieren. Anhand einer Fallstudie zur Oberflächenerfassung des Planeten Mars mit Hilfe einer digitalen Spezialkamera soll in diesem Beitrag untersucht werden, inwiefern Fotografien der Status eines wissenschaftlichen Datums tatsächlich zugesprochen werden kann oder nicht.

Without doubt, there is a great diversity of scientific images both with regard to their appearances and their functions. Diagrams, photographs, drawings, etc. serve as evidence in publications, as eye-catchers in presentations, as surrogates for the research object in scientific reasoning. This fact has been highlighted by Stephen M. Downes who takes this diversity as a reason to argue against a unifying representation-based account of how visualisations play their epistemic role in science. In the following paper, I will suggest an alternative explanation of the diversity of scientific images. This account refers to processes which are caused by the social setting of science. What exactly is meant by this, I will spell out with the aid of Ludwik Fleck’s theory of the social mechanisms of scientific communication.

In den Wissenschaften finden Bilder der unterschiedlichsten Art ihre Verwendung in unserem Streben nach Erkenntnis. Ein Merkmal vieler Arten wissenschaftlicher Visualisierungen besteht darin, dass sie bis dato nur theoretisch erfasste Entitäten sichtbar machen. Sie scheinen daher die Grenze zwischen Beobachtbarem und Unbeobachtbarem in entscheidender Weise zu verschieben. Vor diesem Hintergrund wird vielfach die konstruktivistische These vertreten, die Visualisierungen führten erst in ihrem Produktionsprozess zur Erschaffung des Forschungsobjekts, dieses existiere folglich nicht unabhängig von ihnen in der Welt. Mit dieser These setzt sich der Beitrag kritisch auseinander, indem erstens nachgezeichnet wird, inwiefern konstruktivistische Deutungen in diesem Kontext naheliegen, und zweitens dieser Auffassung die Überlegungen des wissenschaftlichen Realismus als Alternative für die Interpretation der Rolle wissenschaftlicher Visualisierungen im Erkenntnisprozess gegenübergestellt werden.

In today’s science, the output of measurement processes are often visual representations of the data detected. Moreover, we find such visual data as parts of scientific reasoning in different contexts. In this article, we will take a look at two of them. On the one hand, visual representations are used as a kind of surrogate for the real object to ask questions about it – we will call this the exploratory use of visual data. On the other hand, visualisations are often used to communicate research results to scientific peers or to laymen. Instances of the latter case we will subsequently call the explanatory use of visual data. However, in both contexts the question arises what might justify these epistemic practices. Believing without reasons is epistemically irresponsible, it leads to gullibility. Thus, we will try to answer the question whether there are any reasons to support our epistemic practices concerning scientific visualisations in the above-mentioned senses and whether these are good reasons to rely on.

Scientists use visualisations of different kinds in a variety of ways in their scientific work. In the following article, we will take a closer look at the use of photographic pictures as scientific evidence. In accordance with Patrick Maynard’s thesis, photography will be regarded as a family of technologies serving different purposes in divergent contexts. One of these is its ability to detect certain phenomena. Nonetheless, with regard to the philosophical thesis of theory-ladenness of observation, we encounter certain reservations concerning the status of photography and that of photographic pictures in the process of measurement in science. Accordingly, the aim of this paper is twofold: We will discuss suggested solutions both for the technological and for the psychological part of the problem of theory-ladenness appearing in the context of the use of photography in scientific observations. The essential proposal will be to follow Christian Suhm in his advice to make a distinction between theory-relativity and theory-ladenness

In der Wissenschaft spielen Visualisierungen eine immer wichtigere Rolle. Sie sind zum einen Gegenstand der Forschung und zum anderen unverzichtbares Hilfsmittel bei der Präsentation und Distribution von Forschungsergebnissen. Beides stellt neue Anforderungen an den Wissenschaftler und seine praktische wie auch theoretische Arbeit und lässt nach einer kritischen Reflexion dieses Bildhandelns fragen. Was zeigen uns MRT-Bilder in der Medizin wirklich? Wie hat die Weiterentwicklung der Mikroskopie-Technologie unsere Vorstellung von der menschlichen Zelle verändert? Welche Rolle können Bilder bei der Vermittlung von Wissen im didaktischen Kontext spielen? Zeigen uns Visualisierungen die Wirklichkeit? Oder sind sie bloß ein weiterer Anhaltspunkt für die soziale Konstruktion wissenschaftlicher Erkenntnis? Kann es eine Logik der Bilder geben? In welchen Begriffen reden wir über Bilder? Ziel des Sammelbandes Visualisierung und Erkenntnis. Bildverstehen und Bildverwenden in Natur- und Geisteswissenschaften ist es, die Forschung mit und an Visualisierungen in den Einzelwissenschaften auf eine reflektierte Basis zu stellen. Zu diesem Zweck werden nicht nur die wissenschafts- und erkenntnistheoretischen Grundlagen und Herausforderungen beleuchtet, die die Verwendung von Visualisierungen mit sich bringt, sondern auch die Rolle der Visualisierungen im konkreten Anwendungsfall betrachtet. Der Band lässt dabei Geistes- und Naturwissenschaftler, Theoretiker und Praktiker in einen Dialog über den gemeinsamen Forschungsgegenstand treten.

In comparison to other epistemic sources (perception, memory and reason) testimony is the only one dealing with the social aspects of gaining and justifying knowledge. One main problem of the current discussion about knowledge by testimony is the concept of testimony itself. It is quite unclear what the correct notion of testimony is supposed to be. In this essay I present a proposal to define the concept of testimony in making a distinction between the conditions which hold in the speaker’s context and the ones necessary and sufficient for the hearer. Furthermore, I will briefly defend the thesis that there is not one general concept of testimony, but that there are different ones connected via a kind of specialisation relation.

In the following text we will consider the question whether pictures can be regarded as arguments or not. Obviously, classical philosophical approaches lead to a different opinion about this topic than our common sense intuitions, which are fostered by our usage of ordinary language. On the one hand, logicians defend the thesis that arguments are of a linguistic kind. On the other hand, there are everyday contexts where, nevertheless, it seems appropriate to ascribe pictures the status of arguments. It is this apparent tension between the philosophical approach and the one resulting from our linguistic practices that we will analyze in the following text. Examples – both from the everyday as the scientific context – will help us to settle the apparent dissent between the philosophical and the linguistic point of view. In the end, the thesis will be defended that pictorial representations make an essential contribution to communicative acts of argumentation without being regarded as (integral parts of ) arguments themselves.

Without doubt, there is a widespread usage of visualisations in science. However, what exactly the _epistemic status_ of these visual representations in science may be remains an open question. In the following, I will argue that at least some scientific visualisations are indispensible for our cognitive processes. My thesis will be that, with regard to the activity of _learning_, visual representations are of relevance in the sense of contributing to the aim of _scientific_ _understanding_. Taking into account that understanding can be regarded as an epistemic desideratum in its own right, I will argue that, at least in some instances, no understanding can be achieved without the aid of visualisations. Consequently, they are of crucial importance in this process. Moreover, to support this thesis we will make use of some findings in educational psychology

This collection offers a new understanding of the epistemology of measurement. The interdisciplinary volume explores how measurements are produced, for example, in astronomy and seismology, in studies of human sexuality and ecology, in brain imaging and intelligence testing. It considers photography as a measurement technology and Henry David Thoreau's poetic measures as closing the gap between mind and world. By focusing on measurements as the hard-won results of conceptual as well as technical operations the authors of the book no longer presuppose that measurement is always and exclusively a means of representing some feature of a target object or entity. Measurement also provides knowledge about the degree to which things have been standardized or harmonized – it is an indicator of how closely human practices are attuned to each other and the world.

Many contributors of the debate about knowledge by testimony concentrate on the problem of justification. In my paper I will stress a different point – the concept of testimony itself. As a starting point I will use the definitional proposal of Jennifer Lackey. She holds that the concept of testimony should be regarded as entailing two aspects – one corresponding to the speaker, the other one to the hearer. I will adopt the assumption that we need to deal with both aspects. Nevertheless, I will show that her concept – which suggests regarding testimony as an act of communication conveying information – is too broad and, therefore, I will end up with a different twofold definition.