David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Philosophy of Science 49 (2):198-211 (1982)
Although on opposite sides of the logic of discovery debate, Laudan and Simon share a thesis of divorce between discovery (invention) and justification (appraisal); but unlike some other authors, they do not base their respective versions of the divorce-thesis on the empirical/logical distinction. Laudan argues that, in contemporary science, invention is irrelevant to appraisal, and that this irrelevance renders epistemically pointless the inventionist program. Simon uses his divorce-thesis to defend his account of invention, which he claims to be non-inductive--so evading the problem of induction. Underlying both authors' positions are inadequate conceptions of inductive inference. Laudan here ignores the role in contemporary science of plausibility arguments, which provide a crucial link between invention and appraisal, and thence an epistemic rationale for inventionism. Simon's account of invention does covertly call upon inductive principles from the context of appraisal, and this is what gives his program epistemic import; otherwise he would be vulnerable to Laudan's "no rationale" critique. The tensions in both authors reveal the falsity of the divorce-thesis, and the essential function of induction in both appraisal and invention of hypotheses
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Paul Hoyningen-Huene (1987). Context of Discovery and Context of Justification. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 18 (4):501-515.
Jun-Young Oh (2014). Understanding Natural Science Based on Abductive Inference: Continental Drift. [REVIEW] Foundations of Science 19 (2):153-174.
Similar books and articles
Jan M. Zytkow & Herbert A. Simon (1988). Normative Systems of Discovery and Logic of Search. Synthese 74 (1):65 - 90.
Mehul Shah (2007). Is It Justifiable to Abandon All Search for a Logic of Discovery? International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 21 (3):253 – 269.
Larry Laudan (1983). Invention and Justification. Philosophy of Science 50 (2):320-322.
Lillian Hoddeson (2002). Toward a History-Based Model for Scientific Invention: Problem-Solving Practices in the Invention of the Transistor and the Development of the Theory of Superconductivity. Mind and Society 3 (1):67-79.
Andre Kukla (1990). Ten Types of Scientific Progress. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1990:457 - 466.
Márta Fehér (1998). Bad Arguments Against a Good Case (Laudan's Attack on the Strong Programme). International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 12 (3):233-238.
Elie Zahar (1983). Logic of Discovery or Psychology of Invention? British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 34 (3):243-261.
Mario Bunge (1960). The Place of Induction in Science. Philosophy of Science 27 (3):262-270.
Thomas Nickles (1985). Beyond Divorce: Current Status of the Discovery Debate. Philosophy of Science 52 (2):177-206.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads17 ( #139,311 of 1,696,540 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #184,517 of 1,696,540 )
How can I increase my downloads?