Sharpening the tools of imagination

Abstract

Thought experiments, models, diagrams, computer simulations, and metaphors can all be understood as tools of the imagination. While these devices are usually treated separately in philosophy of science, this paper provides a unified account according to which tools of the imagination are epistemically good insofar as they improve scientific imaginings. Improving scientific imagining is characterized in terms of epistemological consequences: more improvement means better consequences. A distinction is then drawn between tools being good in retrospect, at the time, and in general. In retrospect, tools are evaluated straightforwardly in terms of the quality of their consequences. At the cutting edge, tools are evaluated positively insofar as there is reason to believe that using them will have good consequences. Lastly, tools can be generally good, insofar as their use encourages the development of epistemic virtues, which are good because they have good epistemic consequences.

Thought experiments in the Jefferson-Turing controversy: A Kuhnian perspective

“…There are several philosophical accounts of thought experiments 2 . From some perspectives, thought experiments have been seen as intuition pumps (Dennett, 2013), tools of the imagination (Stuart, 2022), sorts of paradoxes (Sorensen, 1992) arguments (Norton, 2004a(Norton, , 2004b, mental models (Miščević, 2007, Nersessian, 2007, scientific models ( Mettini, 2020) or closely related to physical experiments (Mach, 1905(Mach, /1976). However, despite the differences between philosophical approaches, there are epistemic challenges and general features that most of these perspectives share.…”

The qualitative study of scientific imagination.

“…In recent philosophical work, scholars have discussed the different kinds of imagination present in scientific thought experiments (Arcangeli, 2010(Arcangeli, , 2017b(Arcangeli, , 2018Meynell, 2014Meynell, , 2018Murphy, 2020;Stuart, 2017Stuart, , 2021Stuart, , 2022b, the role of imagination in scientific modeling (Frigg, 2010;Salis, 2020Salis, , 2021Salis & Frigg, 2020;Toon, 2012), the role of imagination in scientific theorizing (French, 2020), and much else (see, e.g., the entries in Levy & Godfrey-Smith, 2019). Despite all this, there has been little methodological discussion on how we should go about studying the scientific imagination.…”

“…While it is clear in general that scientists use tools to extend the power of their hands and minds, there are also tools that extend the power of the imagination. More specifically, if a tool is something that provides impetus, direction, or focus to an action, then certainly thought experiments, computer simulations, models, visualizations, artificial intelligence, and metaphors can be thought of as tools that direct and focus the scientific imagination in useful ways (Stuart, 2022b). Not all of these is always a tool of the imagination, and many other things not listed (like formal languages, analogies, and jokes) could count as tools of imagination.…”

“…In the second scenario, certain tools are recommended for use because scientists feel they can safely assume that those tools will guide the imagination in a fruitful direction, though they cannot know for certain whether their application will yield positive results in any particular case without having already tried it. In the third scenario, certain tools are recommended for use because scientists feel they will be helpful for future scientists in general as training exercises for the imagination, whether or not they are useful as particular problem-solving tools (Stuart, 2022b).…”