About this topic
Summary Imre Lakatos (1922-1974) was a Hungarian philosopher of science and mathematics who spent the latter part of his career working in Britain, where he held a position at the London School of Economics.  He is best-known in the philosophy of science for his proposal of a methodology of scientific research programmes, which is in some respects an attempt to form a synthesis of Karl Popper's falsificationism and Thomas Kuhn's model of scientific theory change.  According to Lakatos, scientists work in research programmes which contain an inviolable hard core of laws and a revisable protective belt of auxiliary hypotheses.  Research programmes may be appraised on the basis of whether they make progress.  A programme is said to be progressive if it is both theoretically and empirically progressive.  A programme is theoretically progressive if a stage in the research programme leads to at least one novel prediction, and empirically progressive if at least some of its novel predictions are confirmed.  Scientists are able to rationally choose between competing research programmes by determining whether a programme is progressive.  Programmes which fail to be progressive are degenerative or stagnating and are to be rejected.
Key works The classic statement of Lakatos's methodology of scientific research programmes is 'Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes'.  For Lakatos's proposals on how to employ the history of science to evaluate theories of scientific method, see his 'History of Science and its Rational Reconstructions'.  These and other papers by Lakatos are most easily found in his collected papers The Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes and Mathematics, Science and Epistemology.  Lakatos's best-known work in the philosophy of mathematics is Proofs and Refutations.  In Progress and its Problems, Larry Laudan suggests that hard cores should be taken to be subject to modification, rather than being treated as inviolable.  In Against Method, Feyerabend argues that Lakatos's methodology is "anarchism in disguise", since it does not tell scientists that they must abandon a degenerating in favor of a progressive research programme.  This issue is discussed at length in Alan Musgrave's paper, 'Method or Madness'.
Introductions See chapter nine of Alan Chalmers' What is this thing called science?.  See also Brendan Larvor's book Lakatos: An Introduction
  Show all references
Related categories
Siblings:
296 found
Search inside:
(import / add options)   Sort by:
1 — 50 / 296
  1. Andrew Aberdein (2006). Proofs and Rebuttals: Applying Stephen Toulmin's Layout of Arguments to Mathematical Proof. In Marta Bílková & Ondřej Tomala (eds.), The Logica Yearbook 2005. Filosofia. 11-23.
    This paper explores some of the benefits informal logic may have for the analysis of mathematical inference. It shows how Stephen Toulmin’s pioneering treatment of defeasible argumentation may be extended to cover the more complex structure of mathematical proof. Several common proof techniques are represented, including induction, proof by cases, and proof by contradiction. Affinities between the resulting system and Imre Lakatos’s discussion of mathematical proof are then explored.
    Remove from this list |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  2. Joseph Agassi (1979). The Legacy of Lakatos. Philosophy of the Social Sciences 9 (3):316-326.
  3. Joseph Agassi (1976). The Lakatosian Revolution. In. In R. S. Cohen, P. K. Feyerabend & M. Wartofsky (eds.), Essays in Memory of Imre Lakatos. Reidel. 9--21.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Evandro Agazzi (1985). Commensurability, Incommensurability, and Cumulativity in Scientific Knowledge. Erkenntnis 22 (1-3):51 - 77.
    Until the middle of the present century it was a commonly accepted opinion that theory change in science was the expression of cumulative progress consisting in the acquisition of new truths and the elimination of old errors. Logical empiricists developed this idea through a deductive model, saying that a theory T superseding a theory T must be able logically to explain whatever T explained and something more as well. Popper too shared this model, but stressed that T explains the old (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. F. Michael Akeroyd (2002). Philosophy of Science and History3 of Science: A Non Troubling Interaction. [REVIEW] Journal for General Philosophy of Science 33 (1):159-162.
    Cassandra Pinnick and George Gale (Journal for General Phisophy of Science 31, 109–125) examined the post-Lakatos period of historical cum philosophical case studies and concluded that a new methodology is required. Lakatos' proposed ‘history2’ (the theory- and value-laden reconstruction of history1, the set of historical events) was criticised. Recently a group of scholars have been pursuing a methodology which could be described as history 3, a history1 account of the interaction between the significant scientific papers published during the time period (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. F. Michael Akeroyd (1990). The Challenge to Lakatos Restated. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 41 (3):437-439.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. F. Michael Akeroyd (1986). A Challenge to the Followers of Lakatos. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 37 (3):359-362.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. Da Anapolitanos (1989). Proofs and Refutations: A Reassessment in Imre Lakatos and Theories of Scientific Change. Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science 111:337-345.
    Remove from this list |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. Gunnar Andersson (1994). Criticism and the History of Science: Kuhn's, Lakatos's, and Feyrabend's Criticisms of Critical Rationalism. E.J. Brill.
    In "Criticism and the History of Science" Karl Popper's falsificationist conception of science is developed and defended against criticisms raised by Thomas ...
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. Gunnar Andersson (1986). II. Lakatos and Progress and Rationality in Science: A Reply to Agassi. Philosophia 16 (2):239-243.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. N. Angelis (1989). Lakatos on the Evaluation of Scientific Theories in Imre Lakatos and Theories of Scientific Change. Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science 111:157-167.
    Remove from this list |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. Tom Angier (2012). Alasdair MacIntyre's Analysis of Tradition. European Journal of Philosophy 21 (2):n/a-n/a.
    I argue that, in analysing the structure and development of moral traditions, MacIntyre relies primarily on Kuhn's model of scientific tradition, rather than (as is held by at least two influential commentators) on Lakatos' model. I unpack three foci of Kuhn's conception of the sciences, namely: the ‘crisis’ conception of scientific development, what I call the ‘systematic conception’ of scientific paradigms, and the view that successive paradigms are incommensurable. I then show that these three foci are integrated into MacIntyre's account (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  13. Gavin Ardley (1980). Imre Lakatos: Philosophical Papers. Philosophical Studies 27:245-251.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  14. Roger Ariew & Peter Barker (1986). Duhem on Maxwell: A Case-Study in the Interrelations of History of Science and Philosophy of Science. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1986:145 - 156.
    We examine Duhem's critique of Maxwell, especially Duhem's complaints that Maxwell's theory is too bold or not systematic enough, that it is too dependent on models, and that its concepts are not continuous with those of the past. We argue that these complaints are connected by Duhem's historical criterion for the evaluation of physical theories. We briefly compare Duhem's criterion of historical continuity with similar criteria developed by "historicists" like Kuhn and Lakatos. We argue that Duhem's rejection of theoretical pluralism (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  15. Ferdinando Arzarello, Valeria Andriano, Federica Olivero & Ornella Robutti (1998). Abduction and Conjecturing in Mathematics. Philosophica 61 (1):77-94.
    The logic of discovering and that of justifying have been a permanent source of debate in mathematics, because of their different and apparently contradictory features within the processes of production of mathematical sentences. In fact, a fundamental unity appears as soon as one investigates deeply the phenomenology of conjecturing and proving using concrete examples. In this paper it is shown that abduction, in the sense of Peirce, is an essential unifying activity, ruling such phenomena. Abduction is the major ingredient in (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  16. Roger Backhouse (ed.) (1998). Explorations in Economic Methodology: From Lakatos to Empirical Philosophy of Science. Routledge.
    Is methodology fruitless? Intense controversy has resulted from attempts to understand economics through philosophy of science. This collection clarifies and responds to the issues raised, arguing that methodology is an essential activity.
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  17. Yuri Balashov (1994). Duhem, Quine, and the Multiplicity of Scientific Tests. Philosophy of Science 61 (4):608-628.
    Duhem's and Quine's holistic theses, when properly understood, allow methodologically responsible ways of resolving a conflict between a theoretical system and experience; they only deny the possibility of doing it in an epistemically persuasive way. By developing a "string" model of scientific tests I argue that the pattern of interaction between the elements of a theoretical system arising in response to multiple adverse data can be helpful in locating a "weak spot" in it. Combining this model with anti-holistic arguments of (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  18. W. Balzer (1989). On Incommensurability in Imre Lakatos and Theories of Scientific Change. Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science 111:287-304.
    Remove from this list |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  19. Greg Bamford (1996). Popper and His Commentators on the Discovery of Neptune: A Close Shave for the Law of Gravitation? Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 27 (2):207-232.
    Knowledge of residual perturbations in Uranus's orbit led to Neptune's discovery in 1846 rather than the refutation of Newton's law of gravitation. Karl Popper asserts that this case is untypical of science and that the law was at least prima facie falsified. I argue that these assertions are the product of a false, a priori methodological position, 'Weak Popperian Falsificationism' (WPF), and that on the evidence the law was not, and was not considered, prima facie false. Many of Popper's commentators (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  20. Michael C. Banner (1990). The Justification of Science and the Rationality of Religious Belief. Oxford University Press.
    In this critical examination of recent accounts of the nature of science and of its justification given by Kuhn, Popper, Lakatos, Laudan, and Newton-Smith, Banner contends that models of scientific rationality which are used in criticism of religious beliefs are in fact often inadequate as accounts of the nature of science. He argues that a realist philosophy of science both reflects the character of science and scientific justifications, and suggests that religious belief could be given a justification of the same (...)
    Remove from this list |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  21. Peter Barker (1980). Can Scientific History Repeat? PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1980:20 - 28.
    Although Kuhn, Lakatos and Laudan disagree on many points, these three widely accepted accounts of scientific growth do agree on certain key features of scientific revolutions. This minimal agreement is sufficient to place stringent restraints on the historical development of science. In particular it follows from the common features of their accounts that scientific history can never repeat. Using the term 'supertheory' to denote indifferently the large scale historical entitites employed in all three accounts, it is shown that a supertheory (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  22. Steven Bartlett (1978). "Essays in Memory of Imre Lakatos," Ed. Robert S. Cohen, Paul K. Feyerabend, and Marx W. Wartofsky. The Modern Schoolman 55 (3):292-294.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  23. Kurt Bayertz (1991). Forschungsprogramm Und Wissenschaftsentwicklung. Journal for General Philosophy of Science 22 (2):229 - 243.
    Research Programme and Development of Science. For Imre Lakatos his methodology of scientific research programmes was not only a philosophical theory of science and scientific change but also the conceptual foundation of empirical and historical studies of science. At least terminologically this view is today widely accepted: The concept of a research programme is used in all sorts of literature on science. In the present paper I argue that this concept can lead to serious distortions of empirical and historical studies (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  24. Kurt Bayertz (1991). Forschungsprogramm Und WissenschaftsentwicklungResearch Programme and Development of Science. Journal for General Philosophy of Science 22 (2):229-243.
    Summary For Imre Lakatos hismethodology of scientific research programmes was not only a philosophical theory of science and scientific change but also the conceptual foundation of empirical and historical studies of science. At least terminologically this view is today widely accepted: The concept of aresearch programme is used in all sorts of literature on science. In the present paper I argue that this concept can lead to serious distortions of empirical and historical studies of science if it is not detached (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  25. P. Beltran (1996). La matemática de Lakatos: el papel de la prueba en la metodología. Thémata: Revista de Filosofía 17:305-320.
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  26. Jean Paul Van Bendegem (1988). Non-Formal Properties of Real Mathematical Proofs. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1988:249 - 254.
    The heuristics and strategies presented in Lakatos' Proofs and Refutations are well-known. However they hardly present the whole story as many authors have shown. In this paper a recent, rather spectacular, event in the history of mathematics is examined to gather evidence for two new strategies. The first heuristic concerns the expectations mathematicians have that a statement will be proved using given methods. The second heuristic tries to make sense of the mathematicians' notion of the quality of a proof.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  27. William Berkson (1976). Lakatos One and Lakatos Two: An Appreciation. In. In R. S. Cohen, P. K. Feyerabend & M. Wartofsky (eds.), Essays in Memory of Imre Lakatos. Reidel. 39--54.
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  28. Suzanne Black (2003). Imre Lakatos and Literary Tradition. Philosophy and Literature 27 (2):363-381.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  29. Jerzy Bobryk (2010). Nauka normalna, nauka globalna, fakty instytucjonalne jako cel nauki. Filozofia Nauki 3.
    The paper describes the theory of mirror neurons system and reminds selected empirical researches made in its context. Author evaluates the theory from the theo-retical and methodological point of view. The background of undertaken analysis and evaluation is Lakatos' and Kuhn's methodology and philosophy of science.
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  30. Lawrence Boland (forthcoming). Kuhn Vs. Popper by Way of Lakatos and the Cold War. Journal of Economic Methodology.
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  31. Jesús P. Zamora Bonilla (2002). Verisimilitude and the Dynamics of Scientific Research Programmes. Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 33 (2):349 - 368.
    Some peculiarities of the evaluation of theories within scientific research programmes (SRPs) and of the assessing of rival SRPs are described assuming that scientists try to maximise an 'epistemic utility function' under economic and institutional constraints. Special attention is given to Lakatos' concepts of 'empirical progress' and 'theoretical progress'. A notion of 'empirical verisimilitude' is defended as an appropriate utility function. The neologism 'methodonomics' is applied to this kind of studies.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  32. Montserrat Bordes Solanas (1999). El neopopperianismo de Lakatos: realismo científico y revisabilidad metodológica. Daimon 18:147-154.
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  33. Sebastian Boţic (2010). Is Popper's 'Criterion of Demarcation' Outmoded ? Cultura 7 (1):41-53.
    This paper is concerned with the ′criterion of demarcation′ that Karl Popper put forward, while trying to show that it can be safely said that it is still standing. In doing so, I turn to two main objections to it: a Lakatos-Kuhn vision on the growth of science, and the famous Quine-Duhem thesis. The point that I hopefully made here is that the basic message of this prescriptive method is as respectful as ever, and, although not the subject of this (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  34. Hardy Bouillon (1998). Gunnar Andersson, Criticism and the History of Science. Kuhn's, Lakatos's and Feyerabend's Criticisms of Critical Rationalism, (Philosophy of History and Culture, Vol. 13.). [REVIEW] Journal for General Philosophy of Science 29 (1):133-135.
  35. R. Bradley (1999). Review. Explorations in Economic Methodology: From Lakatos to Empirical Philosophy of Science. R Backhouse. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 50 (2):316-318.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  36. Richard Bradley (1999). Review. Roger Backhouse 'Explorations in Economic Methodology: From Lakatos to Empirical Philosophy of Science' [Book Review]. British Journal of Philosophy of Science 50 (2):316-318.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  37. Günther E. Braun (1975). Empirischer Gehalt Und Falsifizierbarkeit. Journal for General Philosophy of Science 6 (2):203-216.
    Summary In this article will be discussed the famous Popperian terms of ‘empirical content’ and ‘falsifiability’ or ‘refutability’. They are all synonymous with another and are all fundamental principles, not for Popper's philosophy exclusively, but for Lakatos — and for Sneed's rational reconstruction of the ideas of Kuhn's book ‘The Structure of Scientific Revolutions’.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  38. Richard S. Briggs (2009). The Methodology of Hermeneutical Research Programmes in Biblical Studies: Some Insights From the Work of Imre Lakatos. Heythrop Journal 50 (1):109-115.
  39. James Robert Brown (1998). What is a Definition? Foundations of Science 3 (1):111-132.
    According to the standard view of definition, all defined terms are mere stipulations, based on a small set of primitive terms. After a brief review of the Hilbert-Frege debate, this paper goes on to challenge the standard view in a number of ways. Examples from graph theory, for example, suggest that some key definitions stem from the way graphs are presented diagramatically and do not fit the standard view. Lakatos's account is also discussed, since he provides further examples that suggest (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  40. James Robert Brown (1990). Proof and Truth in Lakatos's Masterpiece. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 4 (2):117 – 130.
    Abstract Proofs and Refutations is Lakatos's masterpiece. This article investigates some of its central themes, in particular: the nature of proofs ('Proofs do not prove, they improve'); the nature of definitions (real, not nominal); and the consequences of all this for ontology (platonism vs Popper's World Three).
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  41. Michal Brzezinski & Michal Dzielinski (2009). Is Endogenous Growth Theory Degenerating? Another Look at Lakatosian Appraisal of Growth Theories. Journal of Economic Methodology 16 (3):243-263.
    In a recent paper, Cavusoglu and Tebaldi (2006) provided an evaluation of neoclassical and endogenous growth theories according to Lakatos's methodology of scientific research programmes. This paper offers three criticisms of their contribution as well as a rival Lakatosian appraisal of growth theories. First, we hold that Cavusoglu and Tebaldi do not provide a proper structure of theory comparison in their contribution. Second, we argue that they use an inadequate version of Lakatos's appraisal criterion. Third, against the claim (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  42. Martin Carrier (2012). Historical Approaches: Kuhn, Lakatos and Feyerabend. In James R. Brown (ed.), Philosophy of Science: The Key Thinkers. Continuum Books. 132.
    Remove from this list |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  43. Martin Carrier (2002). Explaining Scientific Progress: Lakatos' Methodological Account of Kuhnian Patterns of Theory Change. In G. Kampis, L.: Kvasz & M. Stöltzner (eds.), Appraising Lakatos: Mathematics, Methodology and the Man. Kluwer. 53--72.
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  44. Martin Carrier (1983). Lakatos Und Bohrs Programm. Journal for General Philosophy of Science 14 (2):368-371.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  45. Nevin Cavusoglu & Edinaldo Tebaldi (2006). Evaluating Growth Theories and Their Empirical Support: An Assessment of the Convergence Hypothesis. Journal of Economic Methodology 13 (1):49-75.
    Understanding the factors determining economic growth has been a major concern for economists and governing bodies for many years. The Solow growth model and the endogenous growth models are the main theories tested and used in the growth literature. This paper discusses the main contributions to economic methodology and uses Lakatos's scientific research program framework to evaluate the main theoretical contributions to growth theory. Based on Lakatos's ideas, Solovian models are both empirically and theoretically progressive. Endogenous growth models, on the (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  46. H. Chang (2000). Imre Lakatos and Paul Feyerabend, For and Against Method, Ed. By Matteo Motterlini. Annals of Science 57:456-457.
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  47. Xiang Chen (1988). Reconstruction of the Optical Revolution: Lakatos Vs. Laudan. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1988:103 - 109.
    According to Lakatos's theory of scientific change, the victory of the wave theory in the nineteenth-century optical revolution was due to its empirical successes. However, historical facts do not support this opinion. Based on Laudan's theory of scientific change, this paper presents a different orientation to reconstruct the optical revolution. By comparing the conceptual problems that both optical theories had, this paper argues that it was the inferior status of the corpuscular theory in dealing with conceptual problems that constituted the (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  48. L. Jonathan Cohen (1979). Philosophical Papers By Imre Lakatos Edited by John Worrall and Gregory Currie Vol. I, The Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes, Viii + 250 Pp., £9.00 Vol. II, Mathematics, Science and Epistemology, X + 286 Pp., £10.50 Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1978. [REVIEW] Philosophy 54 (208):247-.
  49. R. S. Cohen, P. K. Feyerabend & M. Wartofsky (eds.) (1976). Essays in Memory of Imre Lakatos. Reidel.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  50. Richard P. Cooper (2006). Cognitive Architectures as Lakatosian Research Programs: Two Case Studies. Philosophical Psychology 19 (2):199-220.
    Cognitive architectures - task-general theories of the structure and function of the complete cognitive system - are sometimes argued to be more akin to frameworks or belief systems than scientific theories. The argument stems from the apparent non-falsifiability of existing cognitive architectures. Newell was aware of this criticism and argued that architectures should be viewed not as theories subject to Popperian falsification, but rather as Lakatosian research programs based on cumulative growth. Newell's argument is undermined because he failed to demonstrate (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
1 — 50 / 296