Fault-Tracing: Against Quine-Duhem - (Epistemic Studies) by Sam Mitchell (Paperback)
About this item
Highlights
- It is widely believed in philosophy of science that nobody can claim that any verdict of science is forced upon us by the effects of a physical world upon our sense organs and instruments.
- About the Author: Sam Mitchell, Mount Holyoke College, South Hadley, Massachusetts, USA.
- 232 Pages
- Philosophy, Epistemology
- Series Name: Epistemic Studies
Description
About the Book
For more than 65 years philosophers have denied that science can use observations to determine which hypotheses are to blame for refutations. Fault Tracing shows that natural science is entirely observation-based, using independent justifications toBook Synopsis
It is widely believed in philosophy of science that nobody can claim that any verdict of science is forced upon us by the effects of a physical world upon our sense organs and instruments. The Quine-Duhem problem supposedly allows us to resist any conclusion. Views on language aside, Quine is supposed to have shown this decisively.
But it is just false. In many scientific examples, there is simply no room to doubt that a particular hypothesis is responsible for a refutation or established by the observations.
Fault Tracing shows how to play independently established hypotheses against each other to determine whether an arbitrary hypothesis needs to be altered in the light of (apparently) refuting evidence. It analyses real examples from natural science, as well as simpler cases. It argues that, when scientific theories have a structure that prevents them from using this method, the theory looks wrong, and is subject to serious criticism. This is a new, and potentially far-reaching, theory of empirical justification.
About the Author
Sam Mitchell, Mount Holyoke College, South Hadley, Massachusetts, USA.
Shipping details
Return details
Trending Poetry
Discover more options
