Lydia August PHIL306 Professor Swanson 10 October, 2017 The Debate concerning Thought Experiments Thought experiments (TE) are a theory or hypothesis that is thought about rather than performed. TE may not be performed for reasons such as it may be difficult/impossible to execute or because performing the scientific experiment may not be necessary. One who is carrying out a thought experiment explores the ideas and concepts in question solely through the use of previous knowledge the philosopher has. There are some differing opinions on thought experiments that stir a heated debate on the validity and reliability of using pure thought to come to scientific conclusions. Empiricists and Rationalists argue over the concept of TE because their views are drastically different. Rationalists enthusiastically support the idea of TE because they believe that at least some scientific knowledge is known through just thinking about things; there is no need for any examination or scientific observation to be able to make sense of the world. On the other hand, empiricists disagree with the idea of TE because they believe …show more content…
Norton, in his first minor argument, addresses the fact that TE can sometimes have Anti-TE pairs which happen when a TE backs up a result and another TE backs up the denial of the identical outcome. Norton believes that epistemology of TE should give us a reason as to why one TE fails and reveal what caused the TE to be unsuccessful. Secondly, Norton insists that TE are, in reality, just arguments. Norton claims that pure thought’s only ability is to alter what we already know, proposing that pure thought cannot just miraculously create knowledge. According to Norton, the reasoning behind his view that TE are arguments is, in his eyes, defended and supported by his own