This document discusses two hypotheses: H1 is that research into ordinary reasoning over the last century should be considered part of the taxonomy of reasoning styles. H2 is that reasoning styles are not exclusive to individual disciplines and form part of the epistemological and methodological assumptions across scientific practice. The document analyzes whether ordinary reasoning can be integrated into existing taxonomies of reasoning styles. It argues that if ordinary reasoning is a style, it should be possible to detect its characteristic propositions, laws, explanations and criteria of validity through its historical evolution. This would mean reasoning studies are part of historical epistemology and meta-epistemology.

1. Why reasoning studies are part
of historical epistemology
María G. Navarro
Spanish Council for Scientific Research
Visting Scholar at University of Birmingham (UK)

3. Hypothesis Generation
Hacking believes that research into styles of
reasoning is related to the project of a
historical ontology “concerned with objects
or their effects which do not exist in any
recognisable form until they are objects of
scientific study.”

4. Hypothesis 1
On the basis of the idea that each style of
reasoning is built on fundamental cognitive
capacities, I maintain that the totality of
research in the last century into ordinary
reasoning forms part of those styles of
reasoning (henceforth, we shall call this
hypothesis H1).

5. Hypothesis 2
The introduction of the term ‘styles of
reasoning’ allows us to think that H1 is
dependent upon the following second
hypothesis: the complex interdisciplinary
research into ordinary reasoning forms
part of the epistemological or
methodological presuppositions reflected
in the web of scientific practice
(henceforth, H2).

6. • H1— The totality of research in the last
century into ordinary reasoning should be
integrated into the taxonomy of styles of
reasoning.
• H2— A style is not exclusive of one scientific
discipline, and it forms part of the
epistemological or methodological
presuppositions reflected at least in the web
of scientific practice.

7. Hypothesis Validation
But first we shall analyse whether it is
possible to integrate ordinary reasoning
into the taxonomy that Crombie (1994)
himself constructed by following one of
the prototypical styles of reasoning of
the European tradition. As we know,
that classification includes the following
styles:

8. Reasoning styles
• the mathematical sciences (1994, pp. 93-309);
• the experimental exploration and measurement
of observable relations (pp. 313-680, 683-1077);
• the hypothetical construction of analogical
models (pp. 1081-1241);
• the ordering of variety by comparison and
taxonomy (pp. 1245-1291);
• the statistical analysis and the calculus of
probabilities (pp. 1295-1443);
• the historical derivation of genetic
development as a method (pp. 1547-1765).

9. Components-Reasoning styles
Expressed synthetically, the first thesis states
that a style of reasoning introduces the
following entities: (1) new objects of study; (2)
new types of propositions; (3) new laws; and (4)
new types of explanations.
A style of reasoning authenticates itself because
it establishes its own criteria of validity and
objectivity.

10. Towards a history of ordinray
reasoning
If ordinary reasoning is in itself a style, then it
would be theoretically possible to detect all of
the mentioned qualities in a ordinary
reasoning historical evolution.

11. Research topics in ordinary
reasoning historical evolution
Ordinary reasoning constitutes a new style of
reasoning where we might detect, albeit
tentatively as the research associated with it is
on-going:
• its respective propositions, laws and types of
explanations;
• its criteria of validity;
• its theoretical stabilisation processes and/or
accumulation processes;
• its enquiry into the physiological and socio-
cultural projection of typical physiological
cognitive capacities in living creatures.

12. Research programm
Reasoning may be considered as a new object of
enquiry in itself as well as a style.
If this proposal makes sense, it would mean that
Hacking’s programme would form part not only
of a historical epistemology (Daston 1994), but
also of a historical meta-epistemology (Hacking
1999; Kusch 2011).

13. Funding to attend this conference was generously provided by
ENGLOBE-Marie Curie Initial Training Network [FP7-PEOPLE-2007-1-1-
ITN]

14. Thank you!