On the boundary between laboratory 'givens' and laboratory 'tangibles'

0Citations
Citations of this article
6Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

From the 4-part Procedure/Observations/Data/Analysis structure of a laboratory report (generalized from Italian, Chinese and US sources), we distill a fifth flavor, the givens, whose flip side is the freedoms or tangibles of an experiment. (Stated in terms of computer science, we are trying to find inputs and outputs, but these turn out to be surprisingly vague in chemistry.) Then, in the service of a white-boxing ethos (which sounds less severe than 'anti black-boxing'), we establish a movable boundary between givens and tangibles, with implications for 'ontological attitudes' and for the future of chemistry. Next, in revisiting a 2002 exchange between Schummer and Laszlo, which might be paraphrased as the chemist-as-philosopher versus chemist-as-artisan, we apply a second kind of sliding scale which seems to harmonize the discussion. Finally, on a possibly quixotic note, we look briefly at a third kind of sliding scale, now aimed squarely at ontology itself. For illustrative purposes, we adopt an atomocentric viewpoint (as distinct from atomistic), and assign it the provisional name 'Fuzzy CH4 Ontology'. © 2010 The Author(s).

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Boyce, C. (2010). On the boundary between laboratory “givens” and laboratory “tangibles.” Foundations of Chemistry, 12(3), 187–202. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10698-010-9093-6

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free