Demarcating technology from science: Problems and problem solving in technology

Arageorgis, Aristidis; Baltas, Aristides

doi:10.1007/bf01801475

Cited by 10 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, despite the strong connections that exist between them, S & T cannot be merged into a single construct (Arageorgis and Baltas 1989;Wolpert 1992). The distinction between the two fields has been discussed The Rationale for a Teaching Innovation 993 by many researchers 12 and depicted in various notions.…”

Section: The Distinction Between S and T As A Diachronic Elementmentioning

confidence: 97%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The Rationale for a Teaching Innovation About the Interrelationship Between Science and Technology

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper refers to the development of a teaching innovation for the nature of science (NOS), for students aged 11-15, which specifically focuses on the interrelationship between science and technology. The development of the teaching and learning materials relied on inputs from three sources: the history and philosophy of science and technology, existing knowledge concerning the teaching and learning about the NOS, empirical data on students' initial ideas and difficulties about this topic. The first served to provide an account for the various forms of interaction between science and technology, which, in turn, guided the formulation of epistemologically coherent learning objectives. The second provided the pedagogical grounds on which to base the design of the activities. The third facilitated the design of activities that build on students' productive initial ideas, while providing them with guidance to resolve the difficulties they tend to encounter. In this paper, we describe the rationale underlying the teaching and learning materials and we describe the activity sequence they embody.

show abstract

Section: The Distinction Between S and T As A Diachronic Elementmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…Until the Renaissance, all major technological achievements (e.g., fermentation, the use of quinine in medical practice) were attained entirely through the activity of craft technologists without any obvious scientific contribution (Arageorgis and Baltas 1989).…”

Section: The Later Dependency Between S and T: Perspectives Of The Intementioning

confidence: 99%

The Rationale for a Teaching Innovation About the Interrelationship Between Science and Technology

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…fact suitable for the fulfilment of certain human needs (Arageorgis & Baltas 1989). Each of the above points merits further discussion.…”

Section: Some Reflections On the Difference Between Science And Technmentioning

confidence: 96%

Underdetermination and Theory-Ladenness Against Impartiality

Vassallo¹,

Amoretti²

2015

ProtoSociology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Whilst authors like Mary Shaw (1996) tend to believe that SE is still in a state of 'craft' technology in the terminology of Arageorgis and Baltas (1989, p. 213) and has not even reached 'engineering' status at all, academic SE organisations, such as EASST, 37 already speak of software 'science' (as well as of software 'technology'). 38 Where SE has common features with 'real' (i.e., material) engineering, the analysis provided by Arageorgis and Baltas (1989) is relevant; however the specific differences between SE and real engineering are still in need of philosophical attention and reflection.…”

Section: Summary Reflection and Conclusionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Many thanks also to Gert König, Helmut Pulte and Lutz Geldsetzer, editors, as well as the anonymous reviewers of this journal for their helpful remarks and comments on various draft versions of the manuscript; their hints have been taken into account for this published version of our essay. Moreover we would like to thank the editors for sending us a copy of Arageorgis and Baltas (1989). Last but not least thanks to Marlene Fischer at the editorial office for friendly communications and efficient handling of the manuscripts.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Towards a Philosophy of Software Development: 40 Years after the Birth of Software Engineering

et al. 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Over the past four decades, software engineering has emerged as a discipline in its own right, though it has roots both in computer science and in classical engineering. Its philosophical foundations and premises are not yet well understood. In recent times, members of the software engineering community have started to search for such foundations. In particular, the philosophies of Kuhn and Popper have been used by philosophically-minded software engineers in search of a deeper understanding of their discipline. It seems, however, that professional philosophers of science are not yet aware of this new discourse within the field of software engineering. Therefore, this article aims to reflect critically upon recent software engineers' attempts towards a philosophy of software engineering and to introduce our own philosophical thoughts in this context. Finally, we invite the professional philosophers of science to participate in this interesting new discourse.

show abstract

Demarcating technology from science: Problems and problem solving in technology

Cited by 10 publications

References 5 publications

The Rationale for a Teaching Innovation About the Interrelationship Between Science and Technology

The Rationale for a Teaching Innovation About the Interrelationship Between Science and Technology

Underdetermination and Theory-Ladenness Against Impartiality

Towards a Philosophy of Software Development: 40 Years after the Birth of Software Engineering

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About