Shortly after Hooke died in 1703, his miscellaneous papers and unpublished manuscripts were entrusted to Richard Waller, who edited and published some of them in a volume titled The Posthumous Works of Robert Hooke (1705; reprinted, Frank Cass, 1968). Waller himself died, however, before he was able to complete the task of republishing Hooke’s papers and they were eventually handed on to William Derham. After delaying for what some of Hooke’s followers thought to be a scandalously long time, Derham finally published this volume in 1726. It contains numerous papers and notes by Hooke as well as a number of important papers and letters written by Hooke’s contemporaries and found, evidently, among Hooke’s literary remains. This is an exact facsimile reproduction of Derham’s edition of the Philosophical experiments and Observations of the late Eminent Dr. Rober Hooke (1726) except that an analytical table of contents, prepared by the General Editor, has been added. First Published in 1967. Routledge is an imprint of Taylor & Francis, an informa company.

These original contributions by philosophers and historians of science discuss a range of issues pertaining to the testing of hypotheses in modern physics by observation and experiment. Chapters by Lawrence Sklar, Dudley Shapere, Richard Boyd, R. C. Jeffrey, Peter Achinstein, and Ronald Laymon explore general philosophical themes with applications to modern physics and astrophysics. The themes include the nature of the hypothetico-deductive method, the concept of observation and the validity of the theoretical-observation distinction, the probabilistic basis of confirmation, and the testing of idealizations and approximations. The remaining four chapters focus on the history of particular twentieth-century experiments, the instruments and techniques utilized, and the hypotheses they were designed to test. Peter Galison reviews the development of the bubble chamber; Roger Stuewer recounts a sharp dispute between physicists in Cambridge and Vienna over the interpretation of artificial disintegration experiments; John Rigden provides a history of the magnetic resonance method; and Geoffrey Joseph suggests a statistical interpretation of quantum mechanics that can be used to interpret the Stern-Gerlach and double-slit experiments. This book inaugurates the series, Studies from the Johns Hopkins Center for the History and Philosophy of Science, directed by Peter Achinstein and Owen Hannaway. A Bradford Book.

Anthropic Bias explores how to reason when you suspect that your evidence is biased by "observation selection effects"--that is, evidence that has been filtered by the precondition that there be some suitably positioned observer to "have" the evidence. This conundrum--sometimes alluded to as "the anthropic principle," "self-locating belief," or "indexical information"--turns out to be a surprisingly perplexing and intellectually stimulating challenge, one abounding with important implications for many areas in science and philosophy. There are the philosophical thought experiments and paradoxes: the Doomsday Argument; Sleeping Beauty; the Presumptuous Philosopher; Adam & Eve; the Absent-Minded Driver; the Shooting Room. And there are the applications in contemporary science: cosmology ("How many universes are there?", "Why does the universe appear fine-tuned for life?"); evolutionary theory ("How improbable was the evolution of intelligent life on our planet?"); the problem of time's arrow ("Can it be given a thermodynamic explanation?"); quantum physics ("How can the many-worlds theory be tested?"); game-theory problems with imperfect recall ("How to model them?"); even traffic analysis ("Why is the 'next lane' faster?"). Anthropic Bias argues that the same principles are at work across all these domains. And it offers a synthesis: a mathematically explicit theory of observation selection effects that attempts to meet scientific needs while steering clear of philosophical paradox.

What are philosophers trying to achieve? How can they succeed? Does philosophy make progress? Is it in competition with science, or doing something completely different, or neither? Timothy Williamson tackles some of the key questions surrounding philosophy in new and provocative ways, showing how philosophy begins in common sense curiosity, and develops through our capacity to dispute rationally with each other. Discussing philosophy's ability to clarify our thoughts, he explains why such clarification depends on the development of philosophical theories, and how those theories can be tested by imaginative thought experiments, and compared against each other by standards similar to those used in the natural and social sciences. He also shows how logical rigour can be understood as a way of enhancing the explanatory power of philosophical theories. Drawing on the history of philosophy to provide a track record of philosophical thinking's successes and failures, Williams overturns widely held dogmas about the distinctive nature of philosophy in comparison to the sciences, demystifies its methods, and considers the future of the discipline. From thought experiments, to deduction, to theories, this Very Short Introduction will cause you to totally rethink what philosophy is. ABOUT THE SERIES: The Very Short Introductions series from Oxford University Press contains hundreds of titles in almost every subject area. These pocket-sized books are the perfect way to get ahead in a new subject quickly. Our expert authors combine facts, analysis, perspective, new ideas, and enthusiasm to make interesting and challenging topics highly readable. Previously published in hardback as Doing Philosophy

The Philosophy of Scientific Experimentation is a collection of essays that focuses on the identification and clarification of philosophical issues in experimental science, such as the link between science and technology, the role of theory in experimentation involving material and causal intervention, and the impact of modeling and computer simulation on experimentation.

Evolutionary Philosophy is the foundation text for a new belief system. We are all products of evolution. Understanding all of the implications of this statement leads to a comprehensive worldview that can answer our universally shared questions: Where did I come from? What am I? What is a good life? How do I know? These questions and many more are answered in this book, before the beliefs of 60 of the top philosophers of history are put to the test in an evaluation of the survival of their fittest ideas. This is an audacious work of research and analysis from author Ed Gibney, who finishes by asking readers to help Evolutionary Philosophy to grow and adapt as mankind's knowledge continues to accumulate. This clear and accessible work promises to help you reevaluate mankind's place in the universe and your place in society.