This category needs an editor. We encourage you to help if you are qualified.
Volunteer, or read more about what this involves.
Related categories
Subcategories:
245 found
Search inside:
(import / add options)   Order:
1 — 50 / 245
Material to categorize
  1. Oseni Taiwo Afisi, The Problem of Induction and Karl Popper's Hypothetico-Deductive Methodology: A Critical Evaluation.
    The focus of this paper is to examine the problem of induction as a methodology for science. It also evaluates Karl Popper’s deductive approach as the suitable methodology for scientific research. Popper calls his theory ‘hypothetico-deductive methodology’. However, this paper argues the thesis that Popper’s theory of hypothetico-deductive methodology, which he claims is the only appropriate methodology of science is fraught with some theoretical difficulties, which makes it unacceptable. Popper’s logical asymmetry between verification and falsification, we argue, is philosophically untenable. (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  2. Emrah Aktunc (2009). Scientific Pluralism.Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science. Vol. XIX. Annals of Science 66 (2):299-302.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  3. Wolfgang Balzer (2002). Methodological Patterns in a Structuralist Setting. Synthese 130 (1):49 - 68.
    A new approach to analyze scientific methods as patternsof state transitions is proposed and exemplified by the two mostimportant, general methods: induction and deduction. Though only`local' states of science are considered in this paper, includinghypotheses, data, approximation and degree of fit, the approach caneasily be extended to more comprehensive kinds of states. Two `pure'forms of induction are distinguished, enumerative and hypothesisconstruction induction. A combination of these two forms is proposedto yield a more adequate picture of induction. While the pure forms (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  4. Michael Bassey (1968). Science and Society: The Meaning and Importance of Scientific Method. London, University of London P..
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  5. Vadim Batitsky & Zoltan Domotor (2007). When Good Theories Make Bad Predictions. Synthese 157 (1):79 - 103.
    Chaos-related obstructions to predictability have been used to challenge accounts of theory validation based on the agreement between theoretical predictions and experimental data . These challenges are incomplete in two respects: they do not show that chaotic regimes are unpredictable in principle and, as a result, that there is something conceptually wrong with idealized expectations of correct predictions from acceptable theories, and they do not explore whether chaos-induced predictive failures of deterministic models can be remedied by stochastic modeling. In this (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  6. Thomas Brückner (2008). Ulrich Kühne: Die Methode des Gedankenexperiments / Daniel Cohnitz: Gedankenexperimente in der Philosophie. [REVIEW] Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 39 (1):161-165.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  7. Carol Cleland, Historical Science, Experimental Science, and the Scientific Method.
    Many scientists believe that there is a uniform, interdisciplinary method for the prac- tice of good science. The paradigmatic examples, however, are drawn from classical ex- perimental science. Insofar as historical hypotheses cannot be tested in controlled labo- ratory settings, historical research is sometimes said to be inferior to experimental research. Using examples from diverse historical disciplines, this paper demonstrates that such claims are misguided. First, the reputed superiority of experimental research is based upon accounts of scientific methodology (Baconian inductivism (...)
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   11 citations  
  8. Morris Raphael Cohen (1953). Reason and Nature: An Essay on the Meaning of Scientific Method. Dover Publications.
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  9. John James Davies (1968). On the Scientific Method: How Scientists Work. Harlow, Longmans.
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  10. E. L. Dellow (1970). Methods of Science. New York,Universe Books.
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  11. Pierre Maurice Marie Duhem (1954). The Aim and Structure of Physical Theory. Princeton, Princeton University Press.
    This classic work in the philosophy of physical science is an incisive and readable account of the scientific method. Pierre Duhem was one of the great figures in French science, a devoted teacher, and a distinguished scholar of the history and philosophy of science. This book represents his most mature thought on a wide range of topics.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   236 citations  
  12. John Earman (1992). Bayes or Bust? Bradford.
    There is currently no viable alternative to the Bayesian analysis of scientific inference, yet the available versions of Bayesianism fail to do justice to several aspects of the testing and confirmation of scientific hypotheses. Bayes or Bust? provides the first balanced treatment of the complex set of issues involved in this nagging conundrum in the philosophy of science. Both Bayesians and anti-Bayesians will find a wealth of new insights on topics ranging from Bayes's original paper to contemporary formal learning theory. (...)
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   79 citations  
  13. James Kern Feibleman (1972). Scientific Method. The Hague,Nijhoff.
  14. James H. Fetzer (ed.) (1993). Foundations of Philosophy of Science: Recent Developments. Paragon House.
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  15. Paul Feyerabend (2011). Tyranny of Science. Polity Press.
    Conflict and harmony -- The disunity of science -- The abundance of nature -- Dehumanizing humans.
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  16. Steven French (2015). Gerhard Schurz: Philosophy of Science—A Unified Approach. Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 46 (1):241-243.
    Professor Schurz has written a book that is ambitious in both scope and aims. It begins with an introductory chapter on the historical development and general aims of the philosophy of science itself, moves on to issues associated with establishing a basis for a unified approach to science, with extensive consideration of the conceptual toolkit required, then takes us through chapters on laws and empirical testing, the empirical evaluation of theories more generally, including issues of realism and empiricism, before concluding (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  17. Jonathan Fuller, Alex Broadbent & Luis J. Flores (2015). Prediction in Epidemiology and Medicine. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 54:45-48.
  18. Gebhard Geiger (1989). Technik Und Erkenntnis. Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 20 (2):276-286.
    The distinction between sociology of science on the one hand and methodology and systematics on the other, is an established historical fact. Thus, even in modern methodologically orientated philosophy, epistemological analyses still tend to disregard the pragmatic contexts within which scientific knowledge is produced, processed and applied. This situation also reflects the well-known fact that philosophy of science has largely ignored the conceptual and methodological foundations of technology, that is, those disciplines directly and explicitly linked to the practical implications and (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  19. Ronald N. Giere & Richard S. Westfall (eds.) (1973). Foundations of Scientific Method: The Nineteenth Century. Bloomington,Indiana University Press.
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  20. Barry Gower (1996). Scientific Method: A Historical and Philosophical Introduction. Routledge.
    The central theme running throughout this outstanding new survey is the nature of the philosophical debate created by modern science's foundation in experimental and mathematical method. More recently, recognition that reasoning in science is probabilistic generated intense debate about whether and how it should be constrained so as to ensure the practical certainty of the conclusions drawn. These debates brought to light issues of a philosophical nature which form the core of many scientific controversies today. _Scientific Method: A Historical and (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  21. Rom Harré (1983). An Introduction to the Logic of the Sciences. St. Martin's Press.
  22. Rom Harré (1970). The Principles of Scientific Thinking. London,Macmillan.
  23. Errol E. Harris (1970). Hypothesis and Perception: The Roots of Scientific Method. Humanities Press.
    Reissue from the classic Muirhead Library of Philosophy series (originally published between 1890s - 1970s).
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  24. László Hársing (1982). Scientific Reasoning and Epistemic Attitudes. Akadémiai Kiadó.
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  25. Lars‐Göran Johansson (2014). Gerhard Schurz Philosophy of Science. A Unified Approach. Routledge, New York and Abingdon, 2014. Xix + 459 Pp. Isbn 978‐0‐415‐82936‐6. [REVIEW] Theoria 80 (4):368-376.
  26. Matthew Kotzen (2013). Multiple Studies and Evidential Defeat. Noûs 47 (1):154-180.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  27. Maria Kronfeldner (2010). Darwinian 'Blind' Hypothesis Formation Revisited. Synthese 175 (2):193--218.
    Over the last four decades arguments for and against the claim that creative hypothesis formation is based on Darwinian ‘blind’ variation have been put forward. This paper offers a new and systematic route through this long-lasting debate. It distinguishes between undirected, random, and unjustified variation, to prevent widespread confusions regarding the meaning of undirected variation. These misunderstandings concern Lamarckism, equiprobability, developmental constraints, and creative hypothesis formation. The paper then introduces and develops the standard critique that creative hypothesis formation is guided (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  28. Domenic Marbaniang (2009). Philosophy of Science: An Introduction. Google Books.
    INTRODUCTION Philosophy of science is a study of the general nature of scientific practice, explanations, theories, and the relation of scientific knowledge ...
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  29. P. B. Medawar (1984). Pluto's Republic. Oxford University Press.
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   33 citations  
  30. Alex C. Michalos (1971). The Popper-Carnap Controversy. The Hague,Nijhoff.
  31. David Miller (2007). The Objectives of Science. Philosophia Scientiæ 11 (1):21-43.
    Contestant l’opinion commune selon laquelle le problème de la démarcation, contrairement au problème de l’induction, est relativement anecdotique, l’article soutient que le critère poppérien de falsifiabilité donne une réponse irrésistible à la question de savoir ce qui peut être appris d’une investigation empirique. Tout découle du rejet de la logique inductive, joint à la reconnaissance du fait que, avant d’être investiguée, une hypothèse doit être formulée et acceptée. Les hypothèses scientifiques n’émergent ni a posteriori comme les inductivistes le soutiennent, ni (...)
    Remove from this list  
    Translate
      Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  32. Robert Nola & Howard Sankey (2007). Theories of Scientific Method: An Introduction. Routledge.
    What is it to be scientific? Is there such a thing as scientific method? And if so, how might such methods be justified? Robert Nola and Howard Sankey seek to provide answers to these fundamental questions in their exploration of the major recent theories of scientific method. Although for many scientists their understanding of method is something they just pick up in the course of being trained, Nola and Sankey argue that it is possible to be explicit about what this (...)
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  33. Robert Nola & Howard Sankey (eds.) (2000). After Popper, Kuhn, and Feyerabend: Recent Issues in Theories of Scientific Method. Kluwer Academic Publishers.
    Some think that issues to do with scientific method are last century's stale debate; Popper was an advocate of methodology, but Kuhn, Feyerabend, and others are alleged to have brought the debate about its status to an end. The papers in this volume show that issues in methodology are still very much alive. Some of the papers reinvestigate issues in the debate over methodology, while others set out new ways in which the debate has developed in the last decade. The (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   8 citations  
  34. Henri Poincaré (1914). Science and Method. Dover Publications.
    " Vivid . . . immense clarity . . . the product of a brilliant and extremely forceful intellect." — Journal of the Royal Naval Scientific Service "Still a sheer joy to read." — Mathematical Gazette "Should be read by any student, teacher or researcher in mathematics." — Mathematics Teacher The originator of algebraic topology and of the theory of analytic functions of several complex variables, Henri Poincare (1854–1912) excelled at explaining the complexities of scientific and mathematical ideas to lay (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   15 citations  
  35. Azari͡a Prizenti Polikarov (1983). Methodological Problems of Science: The Iteration Cycle: Science--Methodology of Science. Pub. House of the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences.
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  36. Karl R. Popper (1994). The Myth of the Framework: In Defence of Science and Rationality. Routledge.
    In a career spanning sixty years, Sir Karl Popper has made some of the most important contributions to the twentieth century discussion of science and rationality. The Myth of the Framework is a new collection of some of Popper's most important material on this subject. Sir Karl discusses such issues as the aims of science, the role that it plays in our civilization, the moral responsibility of the scientist, the structure of history, and the perennial choice between reason and revolution. (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   21 citations  
  37. Karl R. Popper (1959). The Logic of Scientific Discovery. Routledge.
    Described by the philosopher A.J. Ayer as a work of 'great originality and power', this book revolutionized contemporary thinking on science and knowledge. Ideas such as the now legendary doctrine of 'falsificationism' electrified the scientific community, influencing even working scientists, as well as post-war philosophy. This astonishing work ranks alongside The Open Society and Its Enemies as one of Popper's most enduring books and contains insights and arguments that demand to be read to this day.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1079 citations  
  38. Dominique Raynaud (2011). Chronique et motifs de la controverse entre les écoles médicales de Paris et de Montpellier. In Pascal Nouvel (ed.), Repenser le Vitalisme: Histoire Et Philosophie du Vitalisme. Presses Universitaires de France 33--55.
    The controversy between the medical schools of Paris and Montpellier extends roughly from the death of Barthez (1806) to the publication of the Introduction to the study of experimental medicine of Claude Bernard (1865), with a peak during which the controversy merges with the polemic between Louis Peisse and Jacques Lordat (1840-1843). This study aims to document as accurately as possible the arguments that were exchanged during this controversy, by seeking their reasons and explaining how the experimental medicine in Paris (...)
    Remove from this list  
    Translate
      Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  39. De Langhe Rogier & Greiff Matthias, Standards and the Distribution of Cognitive Labour.
    We present a model of the distribution of labour in science. Such models tend to rely on the mechanism of the invisible hand. Our analysis starts from the necessity of standards in distributed processes and the possibility of multiple standards in science. Invisible hand models turn out to have only limited scope because they are restricted to describing the atypical single-standard case. Our model is a generalisation of these models to J standards; single-standard models such as Kitcher are a limiting (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  40. Muhammad Saud (1990). The Scientific Method of Ibn Al-Haytham. Islamic Research Institute, International Islamic University.
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  41. Gerhard Schurz (2013). Philosophy of Science: A Unified Approach. Routledge.
    Philosophy of Science: A Unified Approach combines a general introduction to philosophy of science with an integrated survey of all its important subfields. As the book’s subtitle suggests, this excellent overview is guided methodologically by "a unified approach" to philosophy of science: behind the diversity of scientific fields one can recognize a methodological unity of the sciences. This unity is worked out in this book, revealing all the while important differences between subject areas. Structurally, this comprehensive book offers a two-part (...)
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   7 citations  
Hypothetico-Deductive Method
  1. Peter Achinstein (1987). Scientific Discovery and Maxwell's Kinetic Theory. Philosophy of Science 54 (3):409-434.
    By reference to Maxwell's kinetic theory, one feature of hypothetico-deductivism is defended. A scientist need make no inference to a hypothesis when he first proposes it. He may have no reason at all for thinking it is true. Yet it may be worth considering. In developing his kinetic theory there were central assumptions Maxwell made (for example, that molecules are spherical, that they exert contact forces, and that their motion is linear) that he had no reason to believe true. In (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   5 citations  
  2. Robert Ackermann (1965). Deductive Scientific Explanation. Philosophy of Science 32 (2):155-167.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  3. Greg Bamford (2002). From Analysis/Synthesis to Conjecture/Analysis: A Review of Karl Popper’s Influence on Design Methodology in Architecture. [REVIEW] Design Studies 23 (3):245-61.
    The two principal models of design in methodological circles in architecture—analysis/synthesis and conjecture/analysis—have their roots in philosophy of science, in different conceptions of scientific method. This paper explores the philosophical origins of these models and the reasons for rejecting analysis/synthesis in favour of conjecture/analysis, the latter being derived from Karl Popper’s view of scientific method. I discuss a fundamental problem with Popper’s view, however, and indicate a framework for conjecture/analysis to avoid this problem.
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  4. 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 (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  5. Pierre Duhem (1994). German Science. Philosophy of Science 61 (2):313.
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  6. Danny Frederick, Haack's Defective Discussion of Popper and the Courts.
    Susan Haack criticises the US courts' use of Karl Popper's epistemology in discriminating acceptable scientific testimony. She claims that acceptable testimony should be reliable and that Popper's epistemology is useless in discriminating reliability. She says that Popper's views have been found acceptable only because they have been misunderstood and she indicates an alternative epistemology which she says can discriminate reliable theories. However, her account of Popper's views is a gross and gratuitous misrepresentation. Her alternative epistemology cannot do what she claims (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  7. Ken Gemes (1994). Schurz on Hypothetico-Deductivism. Erkenntnis 41 (2):171 - 181.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  8. Gary Hatfield (1988). Science, Certainty, and Descartes. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1988:249 - 262.
    During the 1630s Descartes recognized that he could not expect all legitimate claims in natural science to meet the standard of absolute certainty. The realization resulted from a change in his physics, which itself arose not through methodological reflections, but through developments in his substantive metaphysical doctrines. Descartes discovered the metaphysical foundations of his physics in 1629-30; as a consequence, the style of explanation employed in his physical writings changed. His early methodological conceptions, as preserved in the Rules and sketched (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   5 citations  
  9. Urs Hofmann & Michael Baumgartner (2011). Determinism and the Method of Difference. Theoria: Revista de Teoría, Historia y Fundamentos de la Ciencia 26 (2):155-176.
    The first part of this paper reveals a conflict between the core principles of deterministic causation and the standard method of difference, which is widely seen (and used) as a correct method of causally analyzing deterministic structures. We show that applying the method of difference to deterministic structures can giverise to causal inferences that contradict the principles of deterministic causation. The second part then locates the source of this conflict in an inference rule implemented in the method of difference according (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
1 — 50 / 245