Prediction in context: on the comparative epistemic merit of predictive success.

The considerations set out in the paper are intended to suggest that in practical contexts predictive power does not play the outstanding roles sometimes accredited to it in an epistemic framework. Rather, predictive power is part of a network of other merits and achievements. Predictive power needs to be judged differently according to the specific conditions that apply. First, predictions need to be part of an explanatory framework if they are supposed to guide actions reliably. Second, in scientific expertise, the demand for accurate predictions is replaced with the objective of specifying a robust corridor of estimates. Finally, it is highly uncertain to predict the success of research projects. The overall purpose of the paper is to enlarge the debate about predictions by addressing specifically the roles of predictions in application-oriented research.

[1]  V. Bush Science, the Endless Frontier , 1999, Science, the Endless Frontier.

[2]  E. Keller The Century of the Gene , 2000 .

[3]  H. Frederik Nijhout The importance of context in genetics , 2003 .

[4]  Prediction, Explanation, and Dioxin Biochemistry: Science in Public Policy , 2004 .

[5]  R. V. Schomberg,et al.  Science, politics, and morality. , 1989, The Cleft palate journal.

[6]  M. Carrier Theories for Use: On the Bearing of Basic Science on Practical Problems , 2009 .

[7]  Heather Douglas Reintroducing Prediction to Explanation , 2009, Philosophy of Science.

[8]  I. Lakatos Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes , 1976 .

[9]  M. Carrier,et al.  Explanatory Loops and the Limits of Genetic Reductionism , 2006 .

[10]  Torsten Wilholt,et al.  Design Rules: Industrial Research and Epistemic Merit* , 2006, Philosophy of Science.

[11]  Johannes Lenhard,et al.  Computer Simulation: The Cooperation between Experimenting and Modeling* , 2007, Philosophy of Science.

[12]  Martin Carrier,et al.  Science in the context of application , 2011 .

[13]  Seungbae Park Coherence of Our Best Scientific Theories , 2011 .

[14]  W. Bains Epigenesis and Complexity: Should you hire an epistemologist? , 1997, Nature Biotechnology.

[15]  Walter G. Vincenti Engineering Theory in the Making: Aerodynamic Calculation "Breaks the Sound Barrier" , 1997 .

[16]  M. Carrier Knowledge and Control: On the Bearing of Epistemic Values in Applied Science , 2004 .

[17]  Richard C. Strohman,et al.  The coming Kuhnian revolution in biology , 1997, Nature Biotechnology.

[18]  M. Carrier Knowledge, Politics, and Commerce: Science Under the Pressure of Practice , 2011 .

[19]  W. Quine,et al.  The web of belief , 1970 .

[20]  Helen E. Longino,et al.  Gender, politics, and the theoretical virtues , 1995, Synthese.

[21]  Jerome R. Ravetz,et al.  Uncertainty, complexity and post-normal science , 1994 .

[22]  Eric Winsberg,et al.  Simulated Experiments: Methodology for a Virtual World , 2003, Philosophy of Science.

[23]  T. Kuhn,et al.  The Structure of Scientific Revolutions , 1963 .

[24]  Jerome R. Ravetz,et al.  The emergence of post-normal science , 1993 .

[25]  Martin Carrier,et al.  Scientific Knowledge and Scientific Expertise: Epistemic and Social Conditions of Their Trustworthiness , 2010 .