Scientific Reasoning or Damage Control: Alternative Proposals for Reasoning with Inconsistent Representations of the World
David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jonathan Jenkins Ichikawa
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1988:241 - 248 (1988)
Inconsistent representations of the world have in fact played and should play a role in scientific inquiry. However, it would seem that logical analysis of such representations is blocked by the explosive nature of deductive inference from inconsistent premisses. "Paraconsistent logics" have been suggested as the proper way to remove this impediment and to make explication of the logic of inconsistent scientific theories possible. I argue that installing paraconsistent logic as the underlying logic for scientific inquiry is neither a necessary nor a sufficient condition for giving a philosophical alternative, I suggest that identification of heuristic strategies, based on the network of confirming evidence for inconsistent proposals for reasoning from such proposals to their consistent replacements is the proper way to explicate their function in science.
|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
Kevin Davey (2014). Can Good Science Be Logically Inconsistent? Synthese 191 (13):3009-3026.
Similar books and articles
Greg Restall (2002). Paraconsistency Everywhere. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 43 (3):147-156.
Dilip B. Madan (1983). Inconsistent Theories as Scientific Objectives. Philosophy of Science 50 (3):453-470.
Mark Colyvan (2008). The Ontological Commitments of Inconsistent Theories. Philosophical Studies 141 (1):115 - 123.
Peter K. Schotch (1992). Paraconsistent Logic: The View From the Right. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1992:421 - 429.
Graham Priest (1991). Minimally Inconsistent LP. Studia Logica 50 (2):321 - 331.
Bryson Brown (1992). Old Quantum Theory: A Paraconsistent Approach. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1992:397 - 411.
Chris Mortensen (1984). Aristotle's Thesis in Consistent and Inconsistent Logics. Studia Logica 43 (1-2):107 - 116.
Christopher Pincock (2014). How to Avoid Inconsistent Idealizations. Synthese 191 (13):2957-2972.
Peter Vickers (2009). Can Partial Structures Accommodate Inconsistent Science? Principia 13 (2):233-250-.
Heinrich Wansing (2006). Contradiction and Contrariety. Priest on Negation. Poznan Studies in the Philosophy of the Sciences and the Humanities 91 (1):81-93.
Catherine Z. Elgin (2010). Keeping Things in Perspective. [REVIEW] Philosophical Studies 150 (3):439 - 447.
Tommaso Piazza & Francesco Piazza (2010). On Inconsistent Entities. A Reply to Colyvan. Philosophical Studies 150 (2):301 - 311.
Ingo Brigandt (2010). Scientific Reasoning Is Material Inference: Combining Confirmation, Discovery, and Explanation. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 24 (1):31-43.
Franz Huber (2005). Subjective Probabilities as Basis for Scientific Reasoning? British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 56 (1):101-116.
Added to index2011-05-29
Total downloads8 ( #409,756 of 1,934,372 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #434,207 of 1,934,372 )
How can I increase my downloads?