Tracking norms: a plea for a normative digital philosophy of science

Abstract Digital philosophy of science has split into a normative, model-driven first wave and a descriptive, text-driven second wave. This paper argues for a synthesis of these traditions. We propose a framework grounded in normative naturalism for evaluating scientific norms based on their role in solving local, context-specific problems. This framework is advanced through three complementary digital methods: tracking norm effectiveness, computational modeling research systems, and analyzing scientific discourse. To demonstrate our approach, we conduct a detailed analysis of how reviewers use the term “pseudoscience” in a large corpus of open peer review reports. This case study shows how combining quantitative methods with close reading can uncover the operative, and often implicit, norms that guide scientific communities. Our approach suggests that digital philosophy of science, by systematically examining scientific communication, can open new possibilities for empirically-informed normative guidance in practice.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Synthese
Published
2025-08-22
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-025-05200-6
Primary Topic
Philosophy and History of Science
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Tracking norms: a plea for a normative digital philosophy of science

Marcin Miłkowski, Przemysław Nowakowski
Synthese
Philosophy and History of Science
article

Tracking norms: a plea for a normative digital philosophy of science

Marcin Miłkowski, Przemysław Nowakowski
article en

Abstract

Abstract Digital philosophy of science has split into a normative, model-driven first wave and a descriptive, text-driven second wave. This paper argues for a synthesis of these traditions. We propose a framework grounded in normative naturalism for evaluating scientific norms based on their role in solving local, context-specific problems. This framework is advanced through three complementary digital methods: tracking norm effectiveness, computational modeling research systems, and analyzing scientific discourse. To demonstrate our approach, we conduct a detailed analysis of how reviewers use the term “pseudoscience” in a large corpus of open peer review reports. This case study shows how combining quantitative methods with close reading can uncover the operative, and often implicit, norms that guide scientific communities. Our approach suggests that digital philosophy of science, by systematically examining scientific communication, can open new possibilities for empirically-informed normative guidance in practice.

SyntheseVol. 206(3)
Institute of Philosophy and Sociology (PL), Polish Academy of Sciences (PL)
Openalex Percentile: Top 72%
Philosophy and History of Science
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Tracking norms: a plea for a normative digital philosophy of science — Marcin Miłkowski, Przemysław Nowakowski · Synthese (2025) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS