2014
DOI: 10.1007/s11229-014-0519-x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Imagination and insight: a new acount of the content of thought experiments

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
23
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
4
1

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 48 publications
(23 citation statements)
references
References 19 publications
0
23
0
Order By: Relevance
“…For example, Swirski points out that texts employing symmetries like rhyme, meter and alliteration are more powerful than their less catchy cousins (2007,112). Given that 13 Nersessian's suggestion here is comparable to one made also by Kendal Walton, which has since been used by others to focus on how a story's text constrains what can and should be imagined in the TE (Walton 1990; for development see Meynell 2014Meynell , 2018Salis and Frigg 2020).…”
Section: The Philosophy Of Storiesmentioning
confidence: 68%
“…For example, Swirski points out that texts employing symmetries like rhyme, meter and alliteration are more powerful than their less catchy cousins (2007,112). Given that 13 Nersessian's suggestion here is comparable to one made also by Kendal Walton, which has since been used by others to focus on how a story's text constrains what can and should be imagined in the TE (Walton 1990; for development see Meynell 2014Meynell , 2018Salis and Frigg 2020).…”
Section: The Philosophy Of Storiesmentioning
confidence: 68%
“…Let us finally turn to make-believe. Analyses of SMs in terms of make-believe have been suggested by Frigg (2010), Levy (2015) and Toon (2012), and of TEs by Meynell (2014). On this view, to perform a TE or use an SM amounts to exploring a fictional scenario which is defined by the primary truths and the principles of generation.…”
Section: Analysing the Scientific Imaginationmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This is evidenced by the large number of characterizations of thought experiments that have piled up. Thought experiments are arguments (Norton 1991(Norton , 1996(Norton , 2004a(Norton , 2004b, windows into Plato's heaven (Brown 1986(Brown , 1991(Brown , 2004, intuition pumps (Dennett 1984(Dennett , 2013, experiments (Gooding 1992a(Gooding , 1992bSorensen 1992;Stuart 2016b), manipulations of mental models (Gendler 2004;Miščević 1992Miščević , 2007Nersessian 1992Nersessian , 1993Nersessian , 2007Nersessian , 2008Nersessian , 2018, examples (Elgin 2014;Ierodiakonou 2018), "props" for the imagination (Meynell 2014(Meynell , 2018; Salis and Frigg forthcoming), invitations to imagine (Becker 2018), fictions (Elgin 2014), tests of a theory's potential (Bokulich 2001;Lennox 1991), rhetorical devices (Lennox 1991), and many other things.…”
Section: The Epistemology Of Thought Experimentsmentioning
confidence: 99%