@article {10447,
	title = {What{\textquoteright}s in It for the Historian of Science? Reflections on the Value of Philosophy of Science for History of Science},
	journal = {International Studies in the Philosophy of Science},
	volume = {31},
	year = {2017},
	pages = {69-82},
	abstract = {In this article, I explore the value of philosophy of science for history of science. I start by introducing a distinction between two ways of integrating history and philosophy of science: historical philosophy of science (HPS) and philosophical history of science (PHS). I then offer a critical discussion of Imre Lakatos{\textquoteright}s project to bring philosophy of science to bear on historical interpretation. I point out certain flaws in Lakatos{\textquoteright}s project, which I consider indicative of what went wrong with PHS in the past. Finally, I put forward my own attempt to bring out the historiographical potential of philosophy of science. Starting from Norwood Russell Hanson{\textquoteright}s insight that historical studies of science involve metascientific concepts, I argue that philosophical reflection on those concepts can be (and, indeed, has been) historiographically fruitful. I focus on four issues (epistemic values, experimentation, scientific discovery and conceptual change) and discuss their significance and utility for historiographical practice.},
	url = {http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/02698595.2017.1370924},
	author = {Arabatzis, T.}
}
