Underdetermination Thesis, Duhem-Quine Thesis

Abstract

Underdetermination is a relation between evidence and theory. More accurately, it is a relation between the propositions that express the (relevant) evidence and the propositions that constitute the theory. Evidence is said to underdetermine theory. This may mean two things. First, the evidence cannot prove the truth of the theory. Second, the evidence cannot render the theory probable. Let’s call the first deductive underdetermination, and the second inductive (or ampliative) underdetermination. Both kinds of claim are supposed to have a certain epistemic implication, viz., that belief in theory is never warranted by the evidence. This is the underdetermination thesis

Download options

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 72,694

External links

  • This entry has no external links. Add one.
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

  • Only published works are available at libraries.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
69 (#169,940)

6 months
0

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Stathis Psillos
University of Athens

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work

Evidence: Wanted, Alive or Dead.Stathis Psillos - 2015 - Canadian Journal of Philosophy 45 (3):357-381.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Underdetermination and the Explanation of Theory-Acceptance: A Response to Samir Okasha.Ward E. Jones - 2000 - International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 14 (3):299 – 304.
The Duhem‐Quine Thesis Revisited.F. Weinert - 1995 - International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 9 (2):147 – 156.
Must Evidence Underdetermine Theory.John D. Norton - 2003 - The Challenge of the Social and the Pressure of Practice:17--44.