Quick Search:    advanced search

GSW Home   GeoRef Home   My GSW Alerts   Contact GSW   About GSW   Journals List   Help

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Web of Science (26) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Cleland, C. E. Search for Related Content GeoRef GeoRef Citation

Historical science, experimental science, and the scientific method

¹ Department of Philosophy and Center for Astrobiology, University of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado 80309, USA

Many scientists believe that there is a uniform, interdisciplinary method for the practice of good science. The paradigmatic examples, however, are drawn from classical experimental science. Insofar as historical hypotheses cannot be tested in controlled laboratory settings, historical research is sometimes said to be inferior to experimental research. Using examples from diverse historical disciplines, this paper demonstrates that such claims are misguided. First, the reputed superiority of experimental research is based upon accounts of scientific methodology (Baconian inductivism or falsificationism) that are deeply flawed, both logically and as accounts of the actual practices of scientists. Second, although there are fundamental differences in methodology between experimental scientists and historical scientists, they are keyed to a pervasive feature of nature, a time asymmetry of causation. As a consequence, the claim that historical science is methodologically inferior to experimental science cannot be sustained.

Key Words: methodology • induction • history • experimental investigations

This article has been cited by other articles:

				R. Inkpen and G. P. Wilson Explaining the past: abductive and Bayesian reasoning The Holocene, March 1, 2009; 19(2): 329 - 334. [Abstract] [PDF]

				D. G. E. Liverman Environmental geoscience; communication challenges Geological Society, London, Special Publications, January 1, 2008; 305(1): 197 - 209. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. Brasier, N. McLoughlin, O. Green, and D. Wacey A fresh look at the fossil evidence for early Archaean cellular life Phil Trans R Soc B, June 29, 2006; 361(1470): 887 - 902. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. Dodick and S. Argamon Rediscovering the historical methodology of the earth sciences by analyzing scientific communication styles Geological Society of America Special Papers, January 1, 2006; 413(0): 105 - 120. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				G. Borgia, M. Egeth, J. A. Uy, and G. L. Patricelli Juvenile infection and male display: testing the bright male hypothesis across individual life histories Behav. Ecol., September 1, 2004; 15(5): 722 - 728. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				K. T. Kilty Historical science, experimental science, and the scientific method: Comment and Reply: COMMENT Geology, October 1, 2002; 30(10): 951 - 951. [Full Text] [PDF]

				R.J. Bailey Comment: COMMENT Geology, October 1, 2002; 30(10): 952 - 953. [Full Text] [PDF]

				C. E. Cleland Reply: REPLY Geology, October 1, 2002; 30(10): 951 - 952. [Full Text] [PDF]