Jay,
You wrote:
2) David wonders if model-centered methods such as those emerging in fields
like chaos theory and artificial life, where, as in mathematics, the
"phenomena" to be studied are those generated by the models themselves, may
not be more susceptible to self-delusions than the traditional empirical
sciences. Many old-line scientists probably think so. But, truth be told, a
Latourian analysis of the empirical methods would show them to not be so
different in generating the phenomena they study. Changes is paradigms are
not just changes in basic theoretical assumptions; they are changes in the
meta-level perspectives that define what counts as a theory, what counts as
science, what is worth studying, as well as how.
I don't understand your point. Are you blurring the line between empiricism
and solipsism? In your view, what is the status of the world external to the
knower?
Bill Barowy