Scientific Understanding Beyond Representing: Lessons from Ian Hacking’s Work

Abstract We argue that Ian Hacking’s work on experimentation and styles of reasoning offers valuable insights for the current debate on the nature of scientific understanding, which so far has largely been focused on the role of theories and explanations. Hacking’s suggestion that reasoning not only involves thinking but also doing helps to recognise the role of experimentation and manipulation in scientific understanding. We apply this idea by relating Hacking’s views on explanation and theorising to the contextual theory of scientific understanding developed by one of us (De Regt 2017). We then take a constructive approach by developing an account of pragmatic understanding that accommodates styles of reasoning and the centrality of manipulation and intervention in Hacking’s philosophy of science. Our overall aim in the paper is to bring the neglected role of experimentation in producing scientific understanding to the fore. We conclude by suggesting that scientific understanding involves both representing and intervening.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
The Monist
Published
2025-08-31
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/monist/onaf020
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Philosophy and History of Science
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
18.02
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Scientific Understanding Beyond Representing: Lessons from Ian Hacking’s Work

Henk W. de Regt, Oscar Westerblad
1 citations
The Monist
Philosophy and History of Science
18.02
article

Scientific Understanding Beyond Representing: Lessons from Ian Hacking’s Work

Henk W. de Regt, Oscar Westerblad
article en
1 citations

Abstract

Abstract We argue that Ian Hacking’s work on experimentation and styles of reasoning offers valuable insights for the current debate on the nature of scientific understanding, which so far has largely been focused on the role of theories and explanations. Hacking’s suggestion that reasoning not only involves thinking but also doing helps to recognise the role of experimentation and manipulation in scientific understanding. We apply this idea by relating Hacking’s views on explanation and theorising to the contextual theory of scientific understanding developed by one of us (De Regt 2017). We then take a constructive approach by developing an account of pragmatic understanding that accommodates styles of reasoning and the centrality of manipulation and intervention in Hacking’s philosophy of science. Our overall aim in the paper is to bring the neglected role of experimentation in producing scientific understanding to the fore. We conclude by suggesting that scientific understanding involves both representing and intervening.

The MonistVol. 108(4)
Radboud University Nijmegen (NL), University of Iceland (IS)
Openalex Percentile: Top 1%
Philosophy and History of Science
18.02
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.