637:
Statement (3) does not imply anything about statements (1) or (2). Notice that we have not proven statement (3), but we have shown that statements (1) and (2) together imply statement (3). In mathematics, what is proven is not the truth of a particular theorem, but that the axioms of the system imply the theorem. In other words, it is impossible for the axioms to be true and the theorem to be false. The strength of deductive systems is that they are sure of their results. The weakness is that they are abstract constructs which are, unfortunately, one step removed from the physical world. They are very useful, however, as mathematics has provided great insights into natural science by providing useful models of natural phenomena. One result is the development of products and processes that benefit mankind.
663:
observations that would naturally result from either a repeat of the experiment or making more observations from a slightly different set of circumstances. If the predicted observations hold true, one may be on the right track. However, the general principle has not been proven. The principle implies that certain observations should follow, but positive observations do not imply the principle. It is quite possible that some other principle could also account for the known observations, and may do better with future experiments. The implication flows in only one direction, as in the syllogism used in the discussion on deduction. Therefore, it is never correct to say that a scientific principle or hypothesis/theory has been "proven" in the rigorous sense of proof used in deductive systems.
757:
phenomena and wonder what one can learn from those similarities. However, to notice that two things share attributes in several respects does not imply any similarities in other respects. It is possible that the observer has already noticed all of the attributes that are shared and any other attributes will be distinct. Argument from analogy is an unreliable method of reasoning that can lead to erroneous conclusions, and thus cannot be used to establish scientific facts.
260:
191:
2232:
33:
607:, Bertrand Russell humorously referred to mathematics as "the field where we don't know what we are talking about, nor whether or not what we say is true". All theorems and corollaries are proven by exploring the implications of the axiomata and other theorems that have previously been developed. New terms are defined using the primitive terms and other derived definitions based on those primitive terms.
676:
Einstein's theory of
General Relativity has been supported by many observations using the best scientific instruments and experiments. However, his theory now has the same status as Newton's theory of gravitation prior to seeing the problems in the orbit of Mercury. It is highly credible and validated with all we know, but it is not proven. It is only the best we have at this point in time.
2220:
742:. A theory is a hypothesis that has survived many tests and seems to be consistent with other established scientific theories. Since a theory is a promoted hypothesis, it is of the same 'logical' species and shares the same logical limitations. Just as a hypothesis cannot be proven but can be disproved, that same is true for a theory. It is a difference of degree, not kind.
603:(postulates) which are not proven. Indeed, they cannot be proven without circularity. There will also be primitive terms which are not defined, as they cannot be defined without circularity. For example, one can define a line as a set of points, but to then define a point as the intersection of two lines would be circular. Because of these interesting characteristics of
1036:, p. 52) "The above criteria are obviously subjective. Elegance, for example, is not something easily measured, but it is highly prized among scientists." The idea of 'too baroque' is connected to 'simplicity': "a theory jammed with fudge factors is not very elegant. To paraphrase Einstein, a theory should be as simple as possible, but not simpler".(
667:
to validate his equation. However, telescopes eventually became powerful enough to see a slight discrepancy in the orbit of
Mercury. Scientists tried everything imaginable to explain the discrepancy, but they could not do so using the objects that would bear on the orbit of Mercury. Eventually, Einstein developed his theory of
523:"typically pull in different directions". The falsifiability item on the list is related to the criterion proposed by Popper as demarcating a scientific theory from a theory like astrology: both "explain" observations, but the scientific theory takes the risk of making predictions that decide whether it is right or wrong:
368:(I-S) explanation accounts for an occurrence by subsuming it under statistical laws, rather than categorical or universal laws, and the mode of subsumption is itself inductive instead of deductive. The D-N type can be seen as a limiting case of the more general I-S type, the measure of certainty involved being complete, or
666:
A classic example of this is the study of gravitation. Newton formed a law for gravitation stating that the force of gravitation is directly proportional to the product of the two masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between them. For over 170 years, all observations seemed
1113:
It is a whole family of different theories, each of which is a good description of observations only in some range of physical situations...But just as there is no map that is a good representation of the earth's entire surface, there is no single theory that is a good representation of observations
476:
does simplicity concern the ontological commitments of a theory or its mathematical form?). Secondly, these criteria are imprecise, and so there is room for disagreement about the degree to which they hold. Thirdly, there can be disagreement about how they are to be weighted relative to one another,
675:
This is typical of inductive reasoning. All of the observations that seem to validate the theory, do not prove its truth. But one counter-example can prove it false. That means that deductive logic is used in the evaluation of a theory. In other words, if A implies B, then not B implies not A.
671:
and it explained the orbit of
Mercury and all other known observations dealing with gravitation. During the long period of time when scientists were making observations that seemed to validate Newton's theory, they did not, in fact, prove his theory to be true. However, it must have seemed at the
636:
Notice that it is not possible (assuming all of the trivial qualifying criteria are supplied) to be in Arches and not be in Utah. However, one can be in Utah while not in Arches
National Park. The implication only works in one direction. Statements (1) and (2) taken together imply statement (3).
733:
If any predicted outcomes fail, the hypothesis is proven false since if A implies B, then not B implies not A (by deduction). It is then necessary to change the hypothesis and go back to step 3. If the predicted outcomes are confirmed, the hypothesis is not proved, but rather can be said to be
691:
have conducted experiments yielding data suggesting the existence of the Higgs boson. However, realizing that the results could possibly be explained as a background fluctuation and not the Higgs boson, they are cautious and waiting for further data from future experiments. Said Guido
Tonelli:
408:
During the course of history, one theory has succeeded another, and some have suggested further work while others have seemed content just to explain the phenomena. The reasons why one theory has replaced another are not always obvious or simple. The philosophy of science includes the question:
662:
Learning about the physical world often involves the use of inductive reasoning. It is useful in enterprises as science and crime scene detective work. One makes a set of specific observations, and seeks to make a general principle based on those observations, which will point to certain other
756:
Arguments from analogy are another type of inductive reasoning. In arguing from analogy, one infers that since two things are alike in several respects, they are likely to be alike in another respect. This is, of course, an assumption. It is natural to attempt to find similarities between two
1144:
Occam's razor, sometimes referred to as "ontological parsimony", is roughly stated as: Given a choice between two theories, the simplest is the best. This suggestion commonly is attributed to
William of Ockham in the 14th-century, although it probably predates him. See
492:
Whatever might be the ultimate goals of some scientists, science, as it is currently practiced, depends on multiple overlapping descriptions of the world, each of which has a domain of applicability. In some cases this domain is very large, but in others quite
148:
The search for scientific knowledge ends far back into antiquity. At some point in the past, at least by the time of
Aristotle, philosophers recognized that a fundamental distinction should be drawn between two kinds of scientific knowledge—roughly, knowledge
487:
It also is debatable whether existing scientific theories satisfy all these criteria, which may represent goals not yet achieved. For example, explanatory power over all existing observations (criterion 3) is satisfied by no one theory at the moment.
610:
In a deductive system, one can correctly use the term "proof", as applying to a theorem. To say that a theorem is proven means that it is impossible for the axioms to be true and the theorem to be false. For example, we could do a simple
704:
because of a modest excess of events in this mass region that appears, quite consistently, in five independent channels As of today what we see is consistent either with a background fluctuation or with the presence of the
316:
375:
In this view, the D-N mode of reasoning, in addition to being used to explain particular occurrences, can also be used to explain general regularities, simply by deducing them from still more general laws.
165:. Knowledge of the former type is descriptive; knowledge of the latter type is explanatory. It is explanatory knowledge that provides scientific understanding of the world. (Salmon, 2006, pg. 3)
413:. This question has a long history, and many scientists, as well as philosophers, have considered it. The objective is to be able to choose one theory as preferable to another without introducing
383:(D-S) type of explanation, properly regarded as a subclass of the D-N type, explains statistical regularities by deduction from more comprehensive statistical laws. (Salmon 1989, pp. 8–9).
511:, which often is taken as an attribute of a good theory. Occam's razor might fall under the heading of "elegance", the first item on the list, but too zealous an application was cautioned by
1265:
543:
argued that changes in scientists' views of reality not only contain subjective elements, but result from group dynamics, "revolutions" in scientific practice which result in
327:(D-N) explanation of an occurrence is a valid deduction whose conclusion states that the outcome to be explained did in fact occur. The deductive argument is called an
173:: "Scientific inquiry refers to the diverse ways in which scientists study the natural world and propose explanations based on the evidence derived from their work."
563:
not because of empirical failures, but because of a new "paradigm" that exerted control over what scientists felt to be the more fruitful way to pursue their goals.
1224:
161:
each planet periodically reverses the direction of its motion with respect to the background of fixed stars; it is quite a different matter to know
1393:
50:
818:, eds. P. Kitcher and W.C. Salmon, volume XIII of Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science ed.). University of Pittsburgh Press.
97:
1366:
69:
460:
The goal here is to make the choice between theories less arbitrary. Nonetheless, these criteria contain subjective elements, and are
2012:
170:
76:
1449:
1350:
403:
1678:
672:
time that they did. It only took one counterexample (Mercury's orbit) to prove that there was something wrong with his theory.
457:
supported items 1, 2 and 4, but did not mention fruitfulness. On the other hand, Kuhn emphasizes the importance of seminality.
530:"Those among us who are unwilling to expose their ideas to the hazard of refutation do not take part in the game of science."
83:
1849:
858:
1671:
1386:
65:
472:"They cannot determine scientific choice. First, which features of a theory satisfy these criteria may be disputable (
1421:
1184:
1106:
977:
17:
2032:
2027:
1980:
1661:
823:
116:
439:
is fruitful, where the emphasis by
Colyvan is not only upon prediction and falsification, but also upon a theory's
271:
202:
657:
2042:
2261:
2212:
1379:
1309:
1279:
1231:
1012:
948:
921:
751:
54:
2256:
902:
formally stated this need for the "norms for rational theory choice". One of his discussions is reprinted in
1902:
1895:
776:
140:
scientific inquiry succeeds as well as it appears to do in arriving at genuine knowledge. The philosopher
90:
1754:
1729:
1714:
1148:
840:
1927:
1907:
1815:
1811:
1734:
1426:
771:
468:. Also, criteria such as these do not necessarily decide between alternative theories. Quoting Bird:
353:). Depending on a number of additional qualifications, an explanation may be ranked on a scale from
250:
1932:
1572:
1557:
1546:
1523:
394:, that Salmon says "held sway" during the third quarter of the last century (Salmon, p. 10).
225:, who distinguished the forms of approximate and exact reasoning, set out the threefold scheme of
2170:
1917:
1912:
1885:
1820:
1774:
1769:
1704:
1597:
1205:
1057:
985:
372:
1, in the former case, whereas it is less than complete, probability < 1, in the latter case.
43:
136:
scientific inquiry is carried out in practice, and second, to provide an explanatory account of
2125:
2115:
1533:
1459:
1416:
886:
646:
1174:
905:
320:(1965). Salmon summed up his analysis of these developments by means of the following Table.
1975:
1970:
1922:
1890:
1880:
1839:
1619:
1496:
1402:
1037:
1031:
965:
938:
766:
688:
684:
552:
324:
1096:
1955:
1950:
1825:
1709:
1614:
1587:
1469:
1336:
619:
720:
Form a hypothesis that might explain the observations. (This may involve inductive and/or
8:
2017:
1699:
1592:
1567:
1552:
1481:
727:
Identify the implications and outcomes that must follow, if the hypothesis is to be true.
721:
592:
580:
576:
515:: "Everything should be made as simple as possible, but no simpler." It is arguable that
507:
of a "good" theory have been debated for centuries, going back perhaps even earlier than
234:
230:
226:
2165:
2120:
2007:
1830:
1651:
1486:
1476:
1230:. Texas A&M University The motivation & cognition interface lab. Archived from
1127:
730:
Perform other experiments or observations to see if any of the predicted outcomes fail.
679:
Another example of correct scientific reasoning is shown in the current search for the
668:
391:
303:
527:"It must be possible for an empirical scientific system to be refuted by experience."
2224:
1997:
1854:
1644:
1609:
1503:
1442:
1345:
1305:
1296:
1275:
1180:
1102:
1076:
1008:
999:
973:
944:
917:
854:
819:
739:
738:
When a hypothesis has survived a sufficient number of tests, it may be promoted to a
710:
465:
425:
298:(1989) began his historical survey of scientific explanation with what he called the
2095:
2266:
2195:
2150:
2130:
1666:
1656:
1639:
1354:
846:
809:
596:
508:
141:
2185:
2145:
2067:
2022:
1859:
1764:
1749:
1724:
1538:
1518:
878:
512:
454:
504:
440:
2236:
2105:
1965:
1604:
1513:
697:
544:
414:
307:
2250:
2155:
2090:
2062:
1990:
1719:
1634:
889:. Translated by Hugh Tredennick. London: William Heinemann. pp. 181–531.
604:
417:. Several often proposed criteria were summarized by Colyvan. A good theory:
295:
1019:
That decision must be based less on past achievement than on future promise.
2200:
2180:
2135:
2110:
2100:
2072:
2002:
1960:
1834:
1788:
1759:
1739:
1332:
548:
2190:
2175:
2160:
2140:
2057:
1985:
1802:
1792:
1779:
1744:
1694:
1624:
1577:
1464:
1454:
1251:
899:
680:
540:
369:
1371:
259:
190:
2077:
1806:
1797:
1784:
1528:
1491:
556:
461:
2231:
1045:
1844:
1437:
874:
612:
222:
1274: ed.). Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group. pp. 18, 280.
428:) and makes detailed predictions about future observations that can
237:
inference, and also treated the compound forms such as reasoning by
32:
1864:
1582:
429:
1191:
850:
717:
Make a set of observations regarding the phenomenon being studied.
364:
Not all explanations in science are of the D-N type, however. An
1562:
781:
560:
433:
238:
535:
Karl Popper, The Logic of
Scientific Discovery, p. 18 and p. 280
424:
agrees with and explains all existing observations (unificatory/
1629:
1246:
This lecture by Popper was first published as part of the book
1094:
963:
132:
have two functions: first, to provide a descriptive account of
1210:
The
Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2011 Edition)
1153:
The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2011 Edition)
1081:
The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2013 Edition)
1062:
The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2011 Edition)
600:
347:
336:
845:. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. p. 23.
1508:
623:
599:
such as formal logic. In a deductive system, there will be
1351:
Understanding Scientific Progress: Aim-Oriented Empiricism
1007:(3rd ed.). University of Chicago Press. p. 157.
912:(2nd ed.). University of Chicago Press. pp. 208
910:
The Road since Structure: Philosophical Essays, 1970–1993
838:
701:
421:
contains few arbitrary elements (simplicity/parsimony);
221:
The classical model of scientific inquiry derives from
803:
801:
799:
797:
390:
of scientific explanation from the point of view of
1263:
658:
Inductive reasoning § Inductive generalization
57:. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed.
591:Deductive reasoning is the reasoning of proof, or
1043:
794:
482:Alexander Bird, Methodological incommensurability
176:
2248:
807:
752:Inductive reasoning § Argument from analogy
595:. It is the logic used in mathematics and other
566:
1172:
1074:
1329:An Introduction to Logic and Scientific Method
1125:
632:Therefore, I am standing in the state of Utah.
411:What criteria are satisfied by a 'good' theory
1387:
1304:(3rd ed.). University of Chicago Press.
1294:
997:
903:
713:would then contain these steps as a minimum:
936:
498:E.B. Davies, Epistemological pluralism, p. 4
1203:
1146:
1055:
943:. Oxford University Press. pp. 78–79.
651:
1394:
1380:
1138:
1095:Stephen Hawking; Leonard Mlodinow (2010).
964:Stephen Hawking; Leonard Mlodinow (2010).
906:"Chapter 9: Rationality and Theory Choice"
571:
2050:
2013:Relationship between religion and science
1401:
1046:"Simplicity in the Philosophy of Science"
1024:
972:. Random House Digital, Inc. p. 51.
908:. In James Conant, John Haugeland (ed.).
873:
583:are quite different in their approaches.
547:. As an example, Kuhn suggested that the
171:National Research Council (United States)
117:Learn how and when to remove this message
1165:
1101:. Random House Digital, Inc. p. 8.
1077:"§4.1 Methodological Incommensurability"
745:
404:Commensurability (philosophy of science)
1367:Precession of the perihelion of Mercury
1298:The structure of scientific revolutions
1257:
1222:
1216:
1149:"Simplicity; §2: Ontological parsimony"
1087:
1001:The structure of scientific revolutions
832:
696:"We cannot exclude the presence of the
14:
2249:
1225:"Science: Conjectures and refutations"
1119:
957:
930:
811:Four decades of scientific explanation
629:I am standing in Arches National Park.
1375:
1288:
1197:
436:the theory if they are not borne out;
397:
290:
1171:This quote may be a paraphrase. See
991:
842:National Science Education Standards
254:
185:
55:adding citations to reliable sources
26:
1353:, 2017, Paragon House, St. Paul by
1194:is a Boston-based e-book publisher.
1176:Famous Quotes from 100 Great People
1068:
1050:Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy
1044:Simon Fitzpatrick (April 5, 2013).
1030:For example, Hawking/Mlodinow say (
940:The Indispensability of Mathematics
893:
814:(Reprint of Salmon, W.C. 1989. In,
342:) and the conclusion is called the
314:(1948) and culminating in Hempel's
312:Studies in the Logic of Explanation
24:
1322:
839:National Research Council (1996).
310:in the years beginning with their
244:
181:
25:
2278:
2033:Sociology of scientific knowledge
2028:Sociology of scientific ignorance
1981:History and philosophy of science
1360:
1267:The logic of scientific discovery
1147:Baker, Alan (February 25, 2010).
317:Aspects of Scientific Explanation
2230:
2218:
1270:(Reprint of translation of 1935
1075:Bird, Alexander (Aug 11, 2011).
647:Inductive reasoning § Types
477:especially when they conflict."
446:is elegant (formal elegance; no
258:
189:
31:
331:, its premisses are called the
42:needs additional citations for
1422:Analytic–synthetic distinction
867:
177:Accounts of scientific inquiry
144:described scientific inquiry:
66:"Models of scientific inquiry"
13:
1:
787:
567:Aspects of scientific inquiry
1264:Karl Raimund Popper (2002).
1208:. In Edward N. Zalta (ed.).
1204:Baker, Alan (Feb 25, 2010).
1079:. In Edward N. Zalta (ed.).
1060:. In Edward N. Zalta (ed.).
1056:Baker, Alan (Feb 25, 2010).
904:Thomas S Kuhn (2002-11-01).
777:Hypothetico-deductive method
640:
586:
130:Models of scientific inquiry
7:
1755:Hypothetico-deductive model
1730:Deductive-nomological model
1715:Constructivist epistemology
1248:Conjectures and Refutations
1128:"Epistemological pluralism"
760:
734:consistent with known data.
157:. It is one thing to know
10:
2283:
749:
700:Higgs between 115 and 127
655:
644:
443:in suggesting future work;
401:
323:In this classification, a
302:, as it was received from
248:
2209:
2041:
1943:
1873:
1816:Semantic view of theories
1735:Epistemological anarchism
1687:
1672:dependent and independent
1409:
808:Wesley C. Salmon (2006).
772:Explanandum and explanans
622:lies within the state of
251:Pragmatic theory of truth
1558:Intertheoretic reduction
1547:Ignoramus et ignorabimus
1524:Functional contextualism
1342:Dictionary of Philosophy
1173:MobileReference (2011).
883:Aristotle, Volume 1
652:Inductive generalization
2043:Philosophers of science
1821:Scientific essentialism
1770:Model-dependent realism
1705:Constructive empiricism
1598:Evidence-based practice
1126:E Brian Davies (2006).
986:model-dependent realism
615:such as the following:
572:Deduction and induction
2126:Alfred North Whitehead
2116:Charles Sanders Peirce
1295:Thomas S Kuhn (1966).
998:Thomas S Kuhn (1966).
887:Loeb Classical Library
816:Scientific Explanation
709:One way of describing
707:
538:
501:
485:
167:
2262:Philosophy of science
2225:Philosophy portal
1976:Hard and soft science
1971:Faith and rationality
1840:Scientific skepticism
1620:Scientific Revolution
1403:Philosophy of science
937:Mark Colyvan (2001).
767:Deductive-nomological
746:Argument from analogy
694:
689:Large Hadron Collider
685:Compact Muon Solenoid
683:. Scientists on the
553:Copernican Revolution
525:
490:
470:
381:deductive-statistical
366:inductive-statistical
325:deductive-nomological
146:
2257:Conceptual modelling
1951:Criticism of science
1826:Scientific formalism
1710:Constructive realism
1615:Scientific pluralism
1588:Problem of induction
1337:Morris Raphael Cohen
620:Arches National Park
464:rather than part of
51:improve this article
2018:Rhetoric of science
1956:Descriptive science
1700:Confirmation holism
1593:Scientific evidence
1553:Inductive reasoning
1482:Demarcation problem
1179:. MobileReference.
1042:, p. 52) See also:
722:abductive reasoning
593:logical implication
581:inductive reasoning
577:Deductive reasoning
2237:Science portal
2166:Carl Gustav Hempel
2121:Wilhelm Windelband
2008:Questionable cause
1831:Scientific realism
1652:Underdetermination
1487:Empirical evidence
1477:Creative synthesis
1272:Logik der Forchung
1114:in all situations.
966:"What is reality?"
687:experiment at the
669:general relativity
398:Choice of a theory
392:logical empiricism
291:Logical empiricism
270:. You can help by
201:. You can help by
18:Scientific inquiry
2244:
2243:
2086:
2085:
1998:Normative science
1855:Uniformitarianism
1610:Scientific method
1504:Explanatory power
1346:Dagobert D. Runes
860:978-0-309-05326-6
740:scientific theory
711:scientific method
597:axiomatic systems
466:scientific method
426:explanatory power
288:
287:
219:
218:
169:According to the
127:
126:
119:
101:
16:(Redirected from
2274:
2235:
2234:
2223:
2222:
2221:
2196:Bas van Fraassen
2151:Hans Reichenbach
2131:Bertrand Russell
2048:
2047:
1874:Philosophy of...
1657:Unity of science
1450:Commensurability
1396:
1389:
1382:
1373:
1372:
1355:Nicholas Maxwell
1316:
1315:
1303:
1292:
1286:
1285:
1261:
1255:
1245:
1243:
1242:
1236:
1229:
1220:
1214:
1213:
1201:
1195:
1190:
1169:
1163:
1162:
1160:
1159:
1142:
1136:
1135:
1123:
1117:
1116:
1098:The Grand Design
1091:
1085:
1084:
1072:
1066:
1065:
1053:
1039:The Grand Design
1033:The Grand Design
1028:
1022:
1021:
1006:
995:
989:
983:
970:The Grand Design
961:
955:
954:
934:
928:
927:
897:
891:
890:
871:
865:
864:
836:
830:
829:
805:
536:
499:
483:
283:
280:
262:
255:
214:
211:
193:
186:
142:Wesley C. Salmon
122:
115:
111:
108:
102:
100:
59:
35:
27:
21:
2282:
2281:
2277:
2276:
2275:
2273:
2272:
2271:
2247:
2246:
2245:
2240:
2229:
2219:
2217:
2205:
2186:Paul Feyerabend
2146:Michael Polanyi
2082:
2068:Galileo Galilei
2037:
2023:Science studies
1939:
1869:
1860:Verificationism
1765:Instrumentalism
1750:Foundationalism
1725:Conventionalism
1683:
1519:Feminist method
1405:
1400:
1363:
1325:
1323:Further reading
1320:
1319:
1312:
1301:
1293:
1289:
1282:
1262:
1258:
1240:
1238:
1234:
1227:
1221:
1217:
1202:
1198:
1187:
1170:
1166:
1157:
1155:
1143:
1139:
1132:PhilSci Archive
1124:
1120:
1109:
1092:
1088:
1073:
1069:
1029:
1025:
1015:
1004:
996:
992:
980:
962:
958:
951:
935:
931:
924:
898:
894:
879:Prior Analytics
872:
868:
861:
837:
833:
826:
806:
795:
790:
763:
754:
748:
660:
654:
649:
643:
589:
574:
569:
555:" replaced the
545:paradigm shifts
537:
534:
513:Albert Einstein
500:
497:
484:
481:
455:Stephen Hawking
450:modifications).
406:
400:
351:to be explained
293:
284:
278:
275:
268:needs expansion
253:
247:
245:Pragmatic model
215:
209:
206:
199:needs expansion
184:
182:Classical model
179:
123:
112:
106:
103:
60:
58:
48:
36:
23:
22:
15:
12:
11:
5:
2280:
2270:
2269:
2264:
2259:
2242:
2241:
2239:
2227:
2215:
2210:
2207:
2206:
2204:
2203:
2198:
2193:
2188:
2183:
2178:
2173:
2171:W. V. O. Quine
2168:
2163:
2158:
2153:
2148:
2143:
2138:
2133:
2128:
2123:
2118:
2113:
2108:
2106:Rudolf Steiner
2103:
2098:
2096:Henri Poincaré
2093:
2087:
2084:
2083:
2081:
2080:
2075:
2070:
2065:
2060:
2054:
2052:
2045:
2039:
2038:
2036:
2035:
2030:
2025:
2020:
2015:
2010:
2005:
2000:
1995:
1994:
1993:
1983:
1978:
1973:
1968:
1966:Exact sciences
1963:
1958:
1953:
1947:
1945:
1944:Related topics
1941:
1940:
1938:
1937:
1936:
1935:
1930:
1925:
1920:
1915:
1910:
1903:Social science
1900:
1899:
1898:
1896:Space and time
1888:
1883:
1877:
1875:
1871:
1870:
1868:
1867:
1862:
1857:
1852:
1847:
1842:
1837:
1828:
1823:
1818:
1809:
1800:
1795:
1782:
1777:
1772:
1767:
1762:
1757:
1752:
1747:
1742:
1737:
1732:
1727:
1722:
1717:
1712:
1707:
1702:
1697:
1691:
1689:
1685:
1684:
1682:
1681:
1676:
1675:
1674:
1669:
1659:
1654:
1649:
1648:
1647:
1642:
1637:
1627:
1622:
1617:
1612:
1607:
1605:Scientific law
1602:
1601:
1600:
1590:
1585:
1580:
1575:
1570:
1565:
1560:
1555:
1550:
1543:
1542:
1541:
1536:
1526:
1521:
1516:
1514:Falsifiability
1511:
1506:
1501:
1500:
1499:
1489:
1484:
1479:
1474:
1473:
1472:
1462:
1457:
1452:
1447:
1446:
1445:
1443:Mill's Methods
1435:
1424:
1419:
1413:
1411:
1407:
1406:
1399:
1398:
1391:
1384:
1376:
1370:
1369:
1362:
1361:External links
1359:
1358:
1357:
1348:
1339:
1324:
1321:
1318:
1317:
1310:
1287:
1280:
1256:
1250:and is linked
1215:
1196:
1192:MobilReference
1186:978-1611980769
1185:
1164:
1137:
1118:
1108:978-0553907070
1107:
1086:
1067:
1023:
1013:
990:
979:978-0553907070
978:
956:
949:
929:
922:
892:
866:
859:
831:
824:
792:
791:
789:
786:
785:
784:
779:
774:
769:
762:
759:
747:
744:
736:
735:
731:
728:
725:
718:
698:Standard Model
653:
650:
642:
639:
634:
633:
630:
627:
605:formal systems
588:
585:
573:
570:
568:
565:
532:
495:
479:
452:
451:
444:
437:
422:
415:cognitive bias
399:
396:
292:
289:
286:
285:
265:
263:
249:Main article:
246:
243:
217:
216:
196:
194:
183:
180:
178:
175:
153:and knowledge
125:
124:
39:
37:
30:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
2279:
2268:
2265:
2263:
2260:
2258:
2255:
2254:
2252:
2238:
2233:
2228:
2226:
2216:
2214:
2211:
2208:
2202:
2199:
2197:
2194:
2192:
2189:
2187:
2184:
2182:
2179:
2177:
2174:
2172:
2169:
2167:
2164:
2162:
2159:
2157:
2156:Rudolf Carnap
2154:
2152:
2149:
2147:
2144:
2142:
2139:
2137:
2134:
2132:
2129:
2127:
2124:
2122:
2119:
2117:
2114:
2112:
2109:
2107:
2104:
2102:
2099:
2097:
2094:
2092:
2091:Auguste Comte
2089:
2088:
2079:
2076:
2074:
2071:
2069:
2066:
2064:
2063:Francis Bacon
2061:
2059:
2056:
2055:
2053:
2049:
2046:
2044:
2040:
2034:
2031:
2029:
2026:
2024:
2021:
2019:
2016:
2014:
2011:
2009:
2006:
2004:
2001:
1999:
1996:
1992:
1991:Pseudoscience
1989:
1988:
1987:
1984:
1982:
1979:
1977:
1974:
1972:
1969:
1967:
1964:
1962:
1959:
1957:
1954:
1952:
1949:
1948:
1946:
1942:
1934:
1931:
1929:
1926:
1924:
1921:
1919:
1916:
1914:
1911:
1909:
1906:
1905:
1904:
1901:
1897:
1894:
1893:
1892:
1889:
1887:
1884:
1882:
1879:
1878:
1876:
1872:
1866:
1863:
1861:
1858:
1856:
1853:
1851:
1850:Structuralism
1848:
1846:
1843:
1841:
1838:
1836:
1832:
1829:
1827:
1824:
1822:
1819:
1817:
1813:
1812:Received view
1810:
1808:
1804:
1801:
1799:
1796:
1794:
1790:
1786:
1783:
1781:
1778:
1776:
1773:
1771:
1768:
1766:
1763:
1761:
1758:
1756:
1753:
1751:
1748:
1746:
1743:
1741:
1738:
1736:
1733:
1731:
1728:
1726:
1723:
1721:
1720:Contextualism
1718:
1716:
1713:
1711:
1708:
1706:
1703:
1701:
1698:
1696:
1693:
1692:
1690:
1686:
1680:
1677:
1673:
1670:
1668:
1665:
1664:
1663:
1660:
1658:
1655:
1653:
1650:
1646:
1643:
1641:
1638:
1636:
1633:
1632:
1631:
1628:
1626:
1623:
1621:
1618:
1616:
1613:
1611:
1608:
1606:
1603:
1599:
1596:
1595:
1594:
1591:
1589:
1586:
1584:
1581:
1579:
1576:
1574:
1571:
1569:
1566:
1564:
1561:
1559:
1556:
1554:
1551:
1549:
1548:
1544:
1540:
1537:
1535:
1532:
1531:
1530:
1527:
1525:
1522:
1520:
1517:
1515:
1512:
1510:
1507:
1505:
1502:
1498:
1495:
1494:
1493:
1490:
1488:
1485:
1483:
1480:
1478:
1475:
1471:
1468:
1467:
1466:
1463:
1461:
1458:
1456:
1453:
1451:
1448:
1444:
1441:
1440:
1439:
1436:
1434:
1433:
1429:
1425:
1423:
1420:
1418:
1415:
1414:
1412:
1408:
1404:
1397:
1392:
1390:
1385:
1383:
1378:
1377:
1374:
1368:
1365:
1364:
1356:
1352:
1349:
1347:
1343:
1340:
1338:
1334:
1330:
1327:
1326:
1313:
1307:
1300:
1299:
1291:
1283:
1277:
1273:
1269:
1268:
1260:
1253:
1249:
1237:on 2013-09-09
1233:
1226:
1223:Karl Popper.
1219:
1211:
1207:
1200:
1193:
1188:
1182:
1178:
1177:
1168:
1154:
1150:
1141:
1133:
1129:
1122:
1115:
1110:
1104:
1100:
1099:
1090:
1082:
1078:
1071:
1063:
1059:
1051:
1047:
1041:
1040:
1035:
1034:
1027:
1020:
1016:
1010:
1003:
1002:
994:
987:
981:
975:
971:
967:
960:
952:
946:
942:
941:
933:
925:
919:
915:
911:
907:
901:
896:
888:
884:
880:
876:
870:
862:
856:
852:
851:10.17226/4962
848:
844:
843:
835:
827:
825:9780822959267
821:
817:
813:
812:
804:
802:
800:
798:
793:
783:
780:
778:
775:
773:
770:
768:
765:
764:
758:
753:
743:
741:
732:
729:
726:
723:
719:
716:
715:
714:
712:
706:
703:
699:
693:
690:
686:
682:
677:
673:
670:
664:
659:
648:
638:
631:
628:
625:
621:
618:
617:
616:
614:
608:
606:
602:
598:
594:
584:
582:
578:
564:
562:
558:
554:
550:
546:
542:
531:
528:
524:
522:
518:
514:
510:
509:Occam's razor
506:
494:
489:
478:
475:
469:
467:
463:
458:
456:
449:
445:
442:
438:
435:
431:
427:
423:
420:
419:
418:
416:
412:
405:
395:
393:
389:
388:received view
386:Such was the
384:
382:
379:Finally, the
377:
373:
371:
367:
362:
360:
356:
352:
349:
345:
341:
338:
334:
330:
326:
321:
319:
318:
313:
309:
305:
301:
300:received view
297:
296:Wesley Salmon
282:
279:February 2018
273:
269:
266:This section
264:
261:
257:
256:
252:
242:
240:
236:
232:
228:
224:
213:
204:
200:
197:This section
195:
192:
188:
187:
174:
172:
166:
164:
160:
156:
152:
145:
143:
139:
135:
131:
121:
118:
110:
107:February 2018
99:
96:
92:
89:
85:
82:
78:
75:
71:
68: –
67:
63:
62:Find sources:
56:
52:
46:
45:
40:This article
38:
34:
29:
28:
19:
2201:Larry Laudan
2181:Imre Lakatos
2136:Otto Neurath
2111:Karl Pearson
2101:Pierre Duhem
2073:Isaac Newton
2003:Protoscience
1961:Epistemology
1835:Anti-realism
1833: /
1814: /
1805: /
1791: /
1789:Reductionism
1787: /
1760:Inductionism
1740:Evolutionism
1545:
1432:a posteriori
1431:
1427:
1341:
1333:Ernest Nagel
1328:
1297:
1290:
1271:
1266:
1259:
1247:
1239:. Retrieved
1232:the original
1218:
1209:
1206:"Simplicity"
1199:
1175:
1167:
1156:. Retrieved
1152:
1140:
1131:
1121:
1112:
1097:
1089:
1080:
1070:
1061:
1058:"Simplicity"
1049:
1038:
1032:
1026:
1018:
1000:
993:
969:
959:
939:
932:
913:
909:
895:
882:
869:
841:
834:
815:
810:
755:
737:
708:
695:
678:
674:
665:
661:
635:
609:
590:
575:
549:heliocentric
539:
529:
526:
520:
516:
502:
491:
486:
473:
471:
459:
453:
447:
410:
407:
387:
385:
380:
378:
374:
365:
363:
358:
354:
350:
343:
339:
332:
328:
322:
315:
311:
299:
294:
276:
272:adding to it
267:
220:
207:
203:adding to it
198:
168:
162:
158:
154:
150:
147:
137:
133:
129:
128:
113:
104:
94:
87:
80:
73:
61:
49:Please help
44:verification
41:
2191:Ian Hacking
2176:Thomas Kuhn
2161:Karl Popper
2141:C. D. Broad
2058:Roger Bacon
1986:Non-science
1928:Linguistics
1908:Archaeology
1803:Rationalism
1793:Determinism
1780:Physicalism
1745:Fallibilism
1695:Coherentism
1625:Testability
1578:Observation
1573:Objectivity
1534:alternative
1465:Correlation
1455:Consilience
900:Thomas Kuhn
681:Higgs boson
541:Thomas Kuhn
370:probability
344:explanandum
329:explanation
2251:Categories
2078:David Hume
2051:Precursors
1933:Psychology
1913:Economics‎
1807:Empiricism
1798:Pragmatism
1785:Positivism
1775:Naturalism
1645:scientific
1529:Hypothesis
1492:Experiment
1344:(1942) by
1331:(1934) by
1311:0226458083
1281:0415278430
1241:2013-01-22
1158:2011-11-14
1014:0226458083
984:See also:
950:0195166612
923:0226457990
788:References
750:See also:
656:See also:
645:See also:
557:geocentric
505:desiderata
462:heuristics
441:seminality
402:See also:
340:explaining
77:newspapers
1918:Geography
1886:Chemistry
1845:Scientism
1640:ladenness
1460:Construct
1438:Causality
877:(1938). "
875:Aristotle
641:Induction
613:syllogism
587:Deduction
559:views of
517:parsimony
355:potential
333:explanans
308:Oppenheim
235:inductive
231:deductive
227:abductive
223:Aristotle
210:June 2008
2213:Category
1865:Vitalism
1688:Theories
1662:Variable
1583:Paradigm
1470:function
1428:A priori
1417:Analysis
1410:Concepts
761:See also
533:—
521:elegance
496:—
480:—
430:disprove
2267:Inquiry
1923:History
1891:Physics
1881:Biology
1679:more...
1667:control
1563:Inquiry
782:Inquiry
705:boson."
561:Ptolemy
434:falsify
239:analogy
91:scholar
1635:choice
1630:Theory
1568:Nature
1497:design
1308:
1278:
1183:
1105:
1011:
976:
947:
920:
857:
822:
601:axioms
493:small.
448:ad hoc
304:Hempel
233:, and
93:
86:
79:
72:
64:
1302:(PDF)
1235:(PDF)
1228:(PDF)
1005:(PDF)
98:JSTOR
84:books
1539:null
1509:Fact
1430:and
1335:and
1306:ISBN
1276:ISBN
1252:here
1181:ISBN
1103:ISBN
1093:See
1054:and
1009:ISBN
974:ISBN
945:ISBN
918:ISBN
855:ISBN
820:ISBN
624:Utah
579:and
519:and
503:The
474:e.g.
359:true
306:and
159:that
151:that
70:news
881:".
847:doi
702:GeV
432:or
357:to
274:.
205:.
163:why
155:why
138:why
134:how
53:by
2253::
1151:.
1130:.
1111:.
1048:.
1017:.
968:.
916:.
914:ff
885:.
853:.
796:^
724:.)
361:.
348:L:
337:L:
241:.
229:,
1395:e
1388:t
1381:v
1314:.
1284:.
1254:.
1244:.
1212:.
1189:.
1161:.
1134:.
1083:.
1064:.
1052:.
988:.
982:.
953:.
926:.
863:.
849::
828:.
626:.
551:"
346:(
335:(
281:)
277:(
212:)
208:(
120:)
114:(
109:)
105:(
95:·
88:·
81:·
74:·
47:.
20:)
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
