Is gerontology a branch of astrology? The role of advanced age in scientific explanation

Abstract

Although gerontologists have been troubled by meta-scientific problems such as the proper definition of their discipline, the nature of time and age, and the lack of a nonarbitrary distinction between the old and the not old [e.g., Baltes & Goulet (1970) In Life-span developmental psychology (pp. 4–23). New York: Academic Press; Birren (1959) In Handbook of aging and theindividual (pp. 3–42). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press; McKee (1982) Philosophical foundations of gerontology. New York: Human Sciences Press; Reese & Overton (1970) In Life-span developmental psychology (pp. 116–149). New York: Academic Press; Wohlwill (1970) Psychological Review, 77, 49–647], philosophers of science have paid little attention to the meta-scientific problems of gerontology. In this paper some philosophical problems in gerontology are examined through an analysis of the nature of scientific explanation. An argument is presented that claims that gerontology avoids many of the meta-scientific problems associated with time and advanced chronological age because these terms will tend to be obviated or “screened off” in scientific explanations in gerontology.