Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-8bhkd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-01T02:27:17.775Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Taming the Dimensions-Visualizations in Science

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 January 2023

William C. Wimsatt
William C. Wimsatt*
Affiliation:
The University of Chicago
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

The role of pictures and visual modes of presentation of data in science is a topic of increasing interest to workers in artificial intelligence, the psychology of problem solving, and increasing numbers of scientists in all fields who must deal with problems of how to represent large quantities of complex multidimensional data in an intelligible fashion. The use of pictures is marvelously illustrated by but not limited to the biological sciences, so I will use examples from elsewhere as appropriate. With the development of our visual technology—television, videotape, and the computer, the uses (and misuses) of visualization has properly become a matter not only of theoretical but also of practical concern. I will start with a practical story because it has multiple morals, both practical and theoretical—most of which lead elsewhere than I wish to go here.

Type
Part III. Biology: The Non-Propositional Side
Information
PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association , Volume 1990 , Issue 2: Volume Two: Symposia and Invited Papers 1990 , 1990 , pp. 111 - 135
Copyright
Copyright © Philosophy of Science Association 1991

Footnotes

1

I would like to thank Jim Griesemer, Ron McClamrock, Mike Ruse, Jeff Schank, Edward Tufte, and Hugh Wilson for thought provoking conversations, Tufte, Wilson, and Dan Margoliash for bibliography, and for Marey’s photographs and knowledge of his work, I owe major debts to Joel Snyder, and to Marta Braun, respectively. From each of them I have gotten more than I gave. I hope that I can repay the favor some time. Much of this work would have been impossible without support through National Science Foundation Grant, SES-8807869 from the History and Philo-sophy of Science Panel.

References

Bridges, C.B., and Morgan, T.H. (1919), The Second Chromosome Group of Mutant Characters. Carnegie Institute Of Washington, Publication No. 278, Part II, pp. 123–304.Google Scholar
Bridges, C.B., and Morgan, T.H. (1923), The Third Chromosome Group of Mutant Characters in Drosophila melanogaster. Carnegie Institute Of Washington, Publication No. 327.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cartwright, N. (1983), How the Laws of Physics Lie. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Galison, P. (1987), How Experiments End. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Glymour, C. (1980), Theory and Evidence. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Griesemer, JR., and Wimsatt, W. C. (1989), Picturing Weismannism: A Case Study in Conceptual Evolution, in Ruse, M. (ed.), What Philosophy of Biology Is. Dordrecht: Martinus-Nijhoff, pp. 75–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hacking, I. (1983), Representing and Intervening. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Latour, B. (1987), Science in Action. Cambridge: Harvard University press.Google Scholar
Levins, R. (1966), The strategy of model building in population biology, American Scientist. 54:421–431.Google Scholar
Lynch, M., andWoolgar, S. (1990), Representation in Scientific Practice. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Marey, E. (1895), Movement. (International Scientific Series, v. 53), New York: Appleton.Google Scholar
Marey, E. (1984), Etienne-Jules Mare., (introduction by Michel Frizot), Paris: Centre National de la Photographie.Google Scholar
McClamrock, R. : (1992), Existential Cognition: Computational Minds in the Worl., Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Prandtl, L., and Tietjens, O. (1934), Fundamentals of Hydro-and Aeromechanics, Engineering Society Monographs, reprinted by Dover Books, 1957.Google Scholar
Schank, J. C. and Wimsatt, W. C. (1988), “Generative Entrenchment and Evolution”, in PSA-198., Volume 2, Fine, A. and Machamer, P.K.K. (eds.). East Lansing: The Philosophy of Science Association, pp. 33–60.Google Scholar
Schuller, G. and Pollak, G. D. (197), Disproportional frequency representation in the j inferior collicus of horseshoe bats: evidence for an accoustic foevea, Journal of Comparative Physiolog., 132:47–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simon, H. A. (1981), The Sciences of the Artificial., Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Shepard, R. N. (1964), “On subjectively optimum selections among multi-attribute alternatives”, in, Human Judgements and Optimalit., Shelley, M. W. and Bryan, G. L. . New York: Wiley, pp.257-81.Google Scholar
Stewart, I. (1989), Does God Play Dice., London: B. H. Blackwell.Google Scholar
Sturtevant, A.H. and Beadle, G.W. (1939), An Introduction to Genetic., Philadelphia: W. B. Saunders. (facsimile reprint by Dover Books, 1962.)Google Scholar
Thompson, D.W. (1961), On Growth and For. (abridged edition), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Tufte, E. (1983), The Visual Display of Quantitative Information., Cheshire, CT: Graphics Press.Google Scholar
Tufte, E. (1990), Envisioning Information., Cheschire, CT: Graphics Press, von Bekesy, G., (1967), Sensory Inhibition., Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Wilson, H.R., Levi, D., Maffei, L., Rovamo, J. and DeValois, R. (1990), “The perception of form: retina to striate cortex”, in Visual Perception: the Neurophysiological Foundation., Spihlmann, L. and Werner, J. (eds.). New York: Academic Press., pp. 231–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wimsatt, W.C. (1974), “Complexity and Organization”, in PSA 797.,(Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science, volume 20), Schaffner, K.F. and Cohen, R.S. (eds.). Dordrecht: Reidel, pp. 67–86.Google Scholar
Wimsatt, W.C. (1976), “Reductionism, Levels of Organization and the Mind-Body Problem”, in Consciousness and the Brain., Globus, G. , Savodnik, I., and Maxwell, G. (eds.). New York: Plenum, pp. 199–267.Google Scholar
Wimsatt, W.C. (1980), “Randomness and perceived-randomness in evolutionary biology.” Synthes. 43: 287–329.Google Scholar
Wimsatt, W.C. (1981), “Robustness, reliability and overdetermination” in Scientific Inquiry and the Social Science., Brewer, M. and Collins, B. (eds.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. pp. 124–163.Google Scholar
Wimsatt, W.C. (1985), “Forms of aggregativity” in Human Nature and Natural Knowledge, Donagan, A.. Perovich, N. . and Wedin, M. (eds.). Dordrecht: Reidel. pp. 259–293.Google Scholar
Wimsatt, W.C. (1987), “False Models as means to Truer Theories”, in Neutral Models in Biolog., Nitecki, M. , and Hoffman, A. (eds.). London: Oxford University Press, pp. 23–55.Google Scholar
Wimsatt, W.C. (1992), “Golden generalities vs.co-opted anomalies: alternative approaches to the theory and practice of linkage mapping”, in a forthcoming volume edited by Sarkar, S., on Fisher, Haldane, Muller and Wright and the origins of the mathematical theory of evolution. Dordrecht: Martinus-Nijhoff.Google Scholar
Wimsatt, W.C. and Schank, J.C. (1988), Two Constraints on the Evolution of Complex Adaptations and the Means for their Avoidance, in Progress in Evolutio., Nitecki, M. (ed.). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, pp.231–273.Google Scholar