Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

ABDUCTIVE REASONINGEMPIRICAL PROGRESS

ABDUCTIVE REASONING: EMPIRICAL PROGRESS [Traditional positivist philosophy of science inherits from logical research not only its language, but also its focus on the truth question, that is to say, the purpose of using its methods as means for testing hypotheses or formulae. As we saw in the previous chapter, Hempelian models of explanation and confirmation seek to establish the conditions under which a theory (composed by scientific laws) together with initial conditions, explains a certain phenomenon or whether certain evidence confirms a theory. As for logical research, it has been characterized by two approaches, namely the syntactic and the semantic. The former account characterizes the notion of derivability and aims to answer the following question: given theory H (a set of formulae) and formula E, is E derivable from H? The latter characterizes the notion of logical consequence and responds to the following question: is E a logical consequence of H? (Equivalent to: are the models of H models of E?) Through the truth question we can only get a “yes–no” answer with regard to the truth or falsity of a given theory. Aiming solely at this question implies a static viewof scientific practice, one in which there is no place for theory evaluation or change. Notions like derivation, logical consequence, confirmation, and refutation are designed for the corroboration –logical or empirical– of theories.] http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png

ABDUCTIVE REASONINGEMPIRICAL PROGRESS

Part of the Synthese Library Book Series (volume 330)
ALISEDA, ATOCHA
ABDUCTIVE REASONING — Jan 1, 2006
Download PDF
13 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/springer-journals/abductive-reasoning-empirical-progress-SFu0U8W98o

References (0)

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
Springer Netherlands
Copyright
© Springer 2006
ISBN
978-1-4020-3906-5
Pages
153 –166
DOI
10.1007/1-4020-3907-7_6
Publisher site
See Chapter on Publisher Site

Abstract

[Traditional positivist philosophy of science inherits from logical research not only its language, but also its focus on the truth question, that is to say, the purpose of using its methods as means for testing hypotheses or formulae. As we saw in the previous chapter, Hempelian models of explanation and confirmation seek to establish the conditions under which a theory (composed by scientific laws) together with initial conditions, explains a certain phenomenon or whether certain evidence confirms a theory. As for logical research, it has been characterized by two approaches, namely the syntactic and the semantic. The former account characterizes the notion of derivability and aims to answer the following question: given theory H (a set of formulae) and formula E, is E derivable from H? The latter characterizes the notion of logical consequence and responds to the following question: is E a logical consequence of H? (Equivalent to: are the models of H models of E?) Through the truth question we can only get a “yes–no” answer with regard to the truth or falsity of a given theory. Aiming solely at this question implies a static viewof scientific practice, one in which there is no place for theory evaluation or change. Notions like derivation, logical consequence, confirmation, and refutation are designed for the corroboration –logical or empirical– of theories.]

Published: Jan 1, 2006

Keywords: Logical Consequence; Theory Evaluation; Open Extension; Abductive Reasoning; Theory Revision

There are no references for this article.