%0 Conference Paper %1 moessner2017observations %A Mößner, Nicola %D 2017 %K beobachtung desy epistemologie philosophie tagungsbeitrag wissenschaftsphilosophy %R 10.3204/PUBDB-2017-01125 %T Let’s have a look – observations, theories, philosophical troubles %U https://bib-pubdb1.desy.de/record/318131 %X What is the aim of science? Some would say that scientists want to offer true descriptions of the world. Apparently, scientific observations and experiments help toachieve this aim. They yield data to check scientific hypotheses. But do we really have decisive evidence at our disposal? Observational and experimental practicescrucially depend on instruments of different kinds. For example, the discovery ofthe Higgs boson did not only presuppose the world‘s largest particle accelerator,the LHC, but also various detecting technologies. This discovery seems to be a bigsuccess in the history of science. Other experimental results, however, that were noless depending on scientific instruments and formerly also regarded as importantscientific achievements turned out to be complete failures. For instance, no astro­physicist talks about Martian canals today. They were artefacts of observationalpractices – of biased interpretations. Yet what exactly tells us that the detection ofthe Higgs boson wasn‘t similarly biased?This talk is an introduction to the problem of theory-ladenness of observationwhich is lurking in the background. What exactly is it about? How is it related tothe social embedding of scientific practices?

@inproceedings{moessner2017observations, abstract = {What is the aim of science? Some would say that scientists want to offer true descriptions of the world. Apparently, scientific observations and experiments help toachieve this aim. They yield data to check scientific hypotheses. But do we really have decisive evidence at our disposal? Observational and experimental practicescrucially depend on instruments of different kinds. For example, the discovery ofthe Higgs boson did not only presuppose the world‘s largest particle accelerator,the LHC, but also various detecting technologies. This discovery seems to be a bigsuccess in the history of science. Other experimental results, however, that were noless depending on scientific instruments and formerly also regarded as importantscientific achievements turned out to be complete failures. For instance, no astro­physicist talks about Martian canals today. They were artefacts of observationalpractices – of biased interpretations. Yet what exactly tells us that the detection ofthe Higgs boson wasn‘t similarly biased?This talk is an introduction to the problem of theory-ladenness of observationwhich is lurking in the background. What exactly is it about? How is it related tothe social embedding of scientific practices?}, added-at = {2020-07-20T10:35:41.000+0200}, author = {Mößner, Nicola}, biburl = {https://puma.ub.uni-stuttgart.de/bibtex/2e52d81b61b01b25e74b42ef3f922bac2/droessler}, doi = {10.3204/PUBDB-2017-01125}, interhash = {9371d72bc16b04f65121d0bdd17bc261}, intrahash = {e52d81b61b01b25e74b42ef3f922bac2}, keywords = {beobachtung desy epistemologie philosophie tagungsbeitrag wissenschaftsphilosophy}, organization = {SFB-676 Student Council Evening Lecture, Hamburg (Germany)}, pid = {G:(DE-H253)DFG-SFB-676-MGK}, pnm = {SFB 676-MGK - Integrated Research Training Group (IRTG) (DFG-SFB-676)}, reportid = {PUBDB-2017-01125}, school = {Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron, DESY}, subtyp = {Invited}, timestamp = {2020-07-20T08:35:41.000+0200}, title = {{L}et’s have a look – observations, theories, philosophical troubles}, typ = {PUB:(DE-HGF)31}, url = {https://bib-pubdb1.desy.de/record/318131}, year = 2017 }