Philosophical reasoning about science: a quantitative, digital study

Synthese 200 (2) (2022)
  Copy   BIBTEX


In this paper, we set out to investigate the following question: if science relies heavily on induction, does philosophy of science rely heavily on induction as well? Using data mining and text analysis methods, we study a large corpus of philosophical texts mined from the JSTOR database (n = 14,199) in order to answer this question empirically. If philosophy of science relies heavily on induction, just as science supposedly does, then we would expect to find significantly more inductive arguments than deductive arguments and abductive arguments in the published works of philosophers of science. Using indicator words to classify arguments by type (namely, deductive, inductive, and abductive arguments), we search through our corpus to find patterns of argumentation. Overall, the results of our study suggest that philosophers of science do rely on inductive inference. But induction may not be as foundational to philosophy of science as it is thought to be for science, given that philosophers of science make significantly more deductive arguments than inductive arguments. Interestingly, our results also suggest that philosophers of science do not rely on abductive arguments all that much, even though philosophers of science consider abduction to be a cornerstone of scientific methodology.

Similar books and articles

How did Abduction Get Confused with Inference to the Best Explanation? Mcauliffe - 2015 - Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 51 (3):300-319.
Application of Text-Analytics in Quantitative Study of Science and Technology.Samira Ranaei, Arho Suominen, Alan Porter & Tuomo Kässi - 2019 - In Wolfgang Glänzel, Henk F. Moed, Ulrich Schmoch & Mike Thelwall (eds.), Springer Handbook of Science and Technology Indicators. Springer Verlag. pp. 957-982.
Abducting Abduction: Dejá Vu One More Time?Floyd Merrell - 2003 - The Commens Encyclopedia: The Digital Encyclopedia of Peirce Studies.
Digital Design.M. Morris Mano & Michael D. Ciletti - 2002 - Pearson Educación.
What Is the Basic Unit of Scientific Progress? A Quantitative, Corpus-Based Study.Moti Mizrahi - 2022 - Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 53 (4):441-458.
Why Map Issues? On Controversy Analysis as a Digital Method.Noortje Marres - 2015 - Science, Technology, and Human Values 40 (5):655-686.
Defending abduction.Ilkka Niiniluoto - 1999 - Philosophy of Science 66 (3):451.
Problems with Peirce's concept of abduction.Michael Hoffmann - 1999 - Foundations of Science 4 (3):271-305.
Theoretical Foundations for Digital Text Analysis.Gabe Ignatow - 2016 - Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 46 (1):104-120.
CesimaDigital: a tool for the History of Science.Odécio Souza - 2019 - Circumscribere: International Journal for the History of Science 24.


Added to PP

385 (#45,250)

6 months
156 (#15,635)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Moti Mizrahi
Florida Institute of Technology

References found in this work

The Problems of Philosophy.Bertrand Russell - 1912 - Portland, OR: Home University Library.
A practical study of argument.Trudy Govier - 1991 - Belmont, Calif.: Wadsworth Pub. Co..
The Problems of Philosophy.Bertrand Russell - 1912 - Mind 21 (84):556-564.
The Problems of Philosophy.Bertrand Russell - 1912 - Revue de Métaphysique et de Morale 21 (1):22-28.

View all 40 references / Add more references