The experimental paper is conventionally organized into four sections: Introduction, Methods and Materials, Results, and Discussion. Why these particular sections? Why this particular order? My answer is that the experimental paper is an instantiation of a myth that induction is philosophically unproblematic, that it can lead unproblematically to reliable knowledge about the natural world. Because induction as a path to reliable knowledge is, in fact, problematic, scientists need to retain this myth to continue to do science undeterred by doubts concerning the value of their task.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
LatourB. and WoolgarS., Laboratory Life: The Social Construction of Scientific Facts, Sage Library of Social Research, Vol. 80, Sage Publications, Beverly Hills, 1979.
2.
Knorr-CetinaK., The Manufacture of Knowledge: An Essay on the Constructivist and Contextual Nature of Science, Pergamon, Oxford, 1981.
3.
BazermanC., What Written Knoweldge Does: Three Examples of Academic Discourse, Philosophy of Social Science, 11, pp. 361–387, 1981.
4.
GusfieldJ., The Literary Rhetoric of Science: Comedy and Pathos in Drinking Driver Research, American Sociological Review, 41, pp. 16–34, 1976.
5.
WoolgarS., Discovery: Logic and Sequence in a Scientific Text, in The Social Process of Scientific Investigation, KnorrK. D.KrohnR., and WhitleyR. (eds.), D. Reidel, Dordrecht, pp. 239–268, 1981.
6.
Handbook for Authors of Papers in American Chemical Society Publications, American Chemical Society, Washington, D.C., 1978.
7.
Style Manual for Biological Journals, (2nd edition) American Institute of Biological Sciences, Washington, D.C., 1964.
8.
General Notes on the Preparation of Scientific Papers, (1st and 2nd editions), Published for the Royal Society, Cambridge University Press, London, 1950 and 1965.
9.
DayR. A., How to Write and Publish a Scientific Paper, ISI Press, Philadelphia, 1979.
10.
MedawarP. D., Is the Scientific Paper Fraudulent? Yes; It Misrepresents Scientific Thought, Saturday Review, 47, pp. 42–43, August 1, 1964.
11.
Robert Boyle on Natural Philosophy: An Essay with Selections from His Writings, HallM. B. (ed.), Indiana University Press, Bloomington, 1965.
12.
Selected Papers in Molecular Genetics, TaylorJ. H. (ed.), Academic Press, New York, pp. 597–611, 1965.
13.
Science, 222, p. xii, December 23, 1983.
14.
BazermanC., The Early Development of the Experimental Article, Convention of the Modern Language Association of America, New York City, 28 December 1983.
15.
WatsonJ. B., The Molecular Biology of the Gene, (3rd edition), W. A. Benjamin, Menlo Park, 1977.
16.
BaconF., Essays, Advancement of Learning, New Atlantis, and Other Pieces, JonesR. F. (ed.), Odyssey Press, New York, 1937.
17.
BaconF., The New Organon and Related Writings, AndersonF. H. (ed.), The Liberal Arts Press, New York, 1960.
18.
KronickD. A., A History of Scientific and Technical Periodicals: The Origins and Development of the Scientific and Technical Press: 1665–1790, (2nd edition), The Scarecrow Press, Metuchen, New Jersey, 1976.
19.
BaconF., The Advancement of Learning, KitchinG. W. (ed.), Dent, London, 1962 [1915].
20.
NewtonSir I., Opticks, Dover, New York, 1952 [1700].
21.
BroadW. and WadeN., Betrayers of the Truth, Simon and Schuster, New York, 1982.
22.
The Philosophy of Francis Bacon: An Essay on Its Development From 1603 to 1609 With New Translations of Fundamental Texts, FarringtonB. (ed.), University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 1964.
23.
LeibnizG. W., Philosophical Papers and Letters, LoemkerL. E. (ed.), (2nd edition), D. Reidel, Dordrecht, 1976 [1969].
24.
GilbertN., The Transformation of Research Findings into Scientific Knowledge, Social Studies of Science, 6, pp. 281–306, 1976.
25.
SmallH. G., Cited Documents as Concept Symbols, Social Studies in Science, 8, pp. 327–340, 1978.
26.
GallieW. B., Philosophy and the Historical Understanding, (2nd edition), Schocken Books, New York, 1968 [1964].
27.
LyonsJ., Semantics, 2, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1978 [1972].
28.
FishS. E., Self-Consuming Artifacts: The Experience of Seventeenth-Century Literature, University of California Press, Berkeley, pp. 374–382, 1974 [1972].
29.
BarthesR., Elements of Semiology, LaversA. and SmithC. (trans.), Hill and Wang, New York, 1968 [1964].
30.
BarthesR., Science versus Literature, in Introduction to Structuralism, LaneM. (ed.), Basic Books, New York, pp. 410–416, 1970.
31.
LeachE., Culture and Communication: The Logic by Which Symbols are Connected, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1982 [1976].
32.
CrombieA. C., Medieval and Early Modern Science, 2, Doubleday, New York, 1959.
33.
Locke on Human Understanding, TiptonI. C. (ed.), Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1977.
34.
MandelbaumM., Philosophy, Science, and Sense Perception: Historical and Critical Studies, The Johns Hopkins Press, Baltimore, 1966.
35.
RussellB., On Induction, reprinted in The Justification of Induction, SwinburneR. (ed.), Oxford University Press, London, pp. 19–25, 1974 [1912].
36.
Descartes: Philosophical Writings: A Selection, AnscombeE. and GeachP. T. (eds.), Thomas Nelson, Edinburgh, 1954.
37.
CohenM. R. and NagelE., An Introduction to Logic and the Scientific Method, Harcourt, Brace, New York, 1934.
38.
Selections from Democritus, in Selections from Early Greek Philosophy, NahmM. C. (ed.), (4th edition), Appleton-Century-Crofts, New York, 1964.
39.
Galileo, The Assayer, reprinted in Discoveries and Opinions of Galileo, DrakeS. (trans.), Doubleday, New York, 1957.
40.
LockeJ., An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, NidditchP. H. (ed.), The Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1979 [1700].
41.
Lévi-StraussC., The Structural Study of Myth, reprinted in Structural Anthropology, JacobsonC. and SchoepfB. G. (trans.), Basic Books, New York, pp. 206–231, 1963.
42.
Lévi-StraussC., The Story of Asdiwal, reprinted in Structural Anthropology, 2, LaytonM. (trans.), University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp. 146–197, 1976.
