@unpublished{NewWorkAccount2017,
	title = {New work for an account of principles as meta-laws: to protect, constrain, or enable inter-field relations},
	abstract = {The nature of inter‐field relations, defined here as relations among scientific domains, has received far too little attention compared to the widely discussed inter‐theory relations (reduction, emergence, handshaking, etc.) How can we characterize the relations among scientific domains when it comes to inference and reasoning?

This paper argues that one answer to this question resides in the way principles belonging to one domain relate, logically, to principles and laws belonging to other domains. Through the process of scientific inquiry: some principles can clash, some principles explain laws of another domain, or constrain them, or are inconsistent with laws or principles in other domains. There is nevertheless another set of cases when principles act as enablers of other laws or facilitate hybrid model building and unification of domains. We explore here the inter‐field explanatory power of principles. These inter‐field relationships among principles and laws are important for the advancement of science and play a similar explanatory role as the widely discussed inter‐theory relations.

The present argument adopts a version of M. Lange’s approach to symmetry principles qua meta‐laws. (2007, 2009, 2011) In Lange, symmetry principles ‘guide’ conservation laws in a similar way in which laws determine sub‐nomic facts. The emphasis is here less on the internal links between principles and laws of the same domain, but on how principles of a domain relate ‘externally’ to laws and principles of other domains. This ‘principle externalism’ relies also on a relativized version of Lewis’ best systems approach due to Callender and Cohen, called the better best system. (2009,2011) Different domains trade in different natural kinds, but the emphasis here is on overlapping natural kinds and hence the possibility of “distributing” the top‐down explanations due to principles. Possible inter‐field roles of principles discussed here include: clashes of principles, principles constraining laws of other domains, or, on the contrary, principles enabling the hybridization or the even the unification of laws belonging to different domains.

Several examples from contemporary physics are briefly discussed: the case of the correspondence principles, the clash of principles of quantum physics and relativity, and the case of coupling constants in contemporary physics. The epistemic and methodological significance of this inter‐fields for current and future inter‐field knowledge transfer and the emergence of new disciplines is briefly appraised.},
	language = {1. Philosophy of science},
	year = {2017},
}

{"_id":"jztTsQMxbZ2ugG4bB","bibbaseid":"anonymous-newworkforanaccountofprinciplesasmetalawstoprotectconstrainorenableinterfieldrelations-2017","downloads":0,"creationDate":"2019-04-04T02:05:21.910Z","title":"New work for an account of principles as meta-laws: to protect, constrain, or enable inter-field relations","author_short":null,"year":2017,"bibtype":"unpublished","biburl":"https://bibbase.org/zotero-mypublications/imuntean@gmail.com","bibdata":{"bibtype":"unpublished","type":"unpublished","title":"New work for an account of principles as meta-laws: to protect, constrain, or enable inter-field relations","abstract":"The nature of inter‐field relations, defined here as relations among scientific domains, has received far too little attention compared to the widely discussed inter‐theory relations (reduction, emergence, handshaking, etc.) How can we characterize the relations among scientific domains when it comes to inference and reasoning? This paper argues that one answer to this question resides in the way principles belonging to one domain relate, logically, to principles and laws belonging to other domains. Through the process of scientific inquiry: some principles can clash, some principles explain laws of another domain, or constrain them, or are inconsistent with laws or principles in other domains. There is nevertheless another set of cases when principles act as enablers of other laws or facilitate hybrid model building and unification of domains. We explore here the inter‐field explanatory power of principles. These inter‐field relationships among principles and laws are important for the advancement of science and play a similar explanatory role as the widely discussed inter‐theory relations. The present argument adopts a version of M. Lange’s approach to symmetry principles qua meta‐laws. (2007, 2009, 2011) In Lange, symmetry principles ‘guide’ conservation laws in a similar way in which laws determine sub‐nomic facts. The emphasis is here less on the internal links between principles and laws of the same domain, but on how principles of a domain relate ‘externally’ to laws and principles of other domains. This ‘principle externalism’ relies also on a relativized version of Lewis’ best systems approach due to Callender and Cohen, called the better best system. (2009,2011) Different domains trade in different natural kinds, but the emphasis here is on overlapping natural kinds and hence the possibility of “distributing” the top‐down explanations due to principles. Possible inter‐field roles of principles discussed here include: clashes of principles, principles constraining laws of other domains, or, on the contrary, principles enabling the hybridization or the even the unification of laws belonging to different domains. Several examples from contemporary physics are briefly discussed: the case of the correspondence principles, the clash of principles of quantum physics and relativity, and the case of coupling constants in contemporary physics. The epistemic and methodological significance of this inter‐fields for current and future inter‐field knowledge transfer and the emergence of new disciplines is briefly appraised.","language":"1. Philosophy of science","year":"2017","bibtex":"@unpublished{NewWorkAccount2017,\n\ttitle = {New work for an account of principles as meta-laws: to protect, constrain, or enable inter-field relations},\n\tabstract = {The nature of inter‐field relations, defined here as relations among scientific domains, has received far too little attention compared to the widely discussed inter‐theory relations (reduction, emergence, handshaking, etc.) How can we characterize the relations among scientific domains when it comes to inference and reasoning?\n\nThis paper argues that one answer to this question resides in the way principles belonging to one domain relate, logically, to principles and laws belonging to other domains. Through the process of scientific inquiry: some principles can clash, some principles explain laws of another domain, or constrain them, or are inconsistent with laws or principles in other domains. There is nevertheless another set of cases when principles act as enablers of other laws or facilitate hybrid model building and unification of domains. We explore here the inter‐field explanatory power of principles. These inter‐field relationships among principles and laws are important for the advancement of science and play a similar explanatory role as the widely discussed inter‐theory relations.\n\nThe present argument adopts a version of M. Lange’s approach to symmetry principles qua meta‐laws. (2007, 2009, 2011) In Lange, symmetry principles ‘guide’ conservation laws in a similar way in which laws determine sub‐nomic facts. The emphasis is here less on the internal links between principles and laws of the same domain, but on how principles of a domain relate ‘externally’ to laws and principles of other domains. This ‘principle externalism’ relies also on a relativized version of Lewis’ best systems approach due to Callender and Cohen, called the better best system. (2009,2011) Different domains trade in different natural kinds, but the emphasis here is on overlapping natural kinds and hence the possibility of “distributing” the top‐down explanations due to principles. Possible inter‐field roles of principles discussed here include: clashes of principles, principles constraining laws of other domains, or, on the contrary, principles enabling the hybridization or the even the unification of laws belonging to different domains.\n\nSeveral examples from contemporary physics are briefly discussed: the case of the correspondence principles, the clash of principles of quantum physics and relativity, and the case of coupling constants in contemporary physics. The epistemic and methodological significance of this inter‐fields for current and future inter‐field knowledge transfer and the emergence of new disciplines is briefly appraised.},\n\tlanguage = {1. Philosophy of science},\n\tyear = {2017},\n}\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n","key":"NewWorkAccount2017","id":"NewWorkAccount2017","bibbaseid":"anonymous-newworkforanaccountofprinciplesasmetalawstoprotectconstrainorenableinterfieldrelations-2017","role":"","urls":{},"metadata":{"authorlinks":{}},"downloads":0},"search_terms":["new","work","account","principles","meta","laws","protect","constrain","enable","inter","field","relations"],"keywords":[],"authorIDs":[],"dataSources":["4K2MoJSeWKBxPigwg","wjn8cK5LeFh95gDh5"]}