Advanced

Lakatos's challenge? : Auxiliary hypotheses and non-monotonous inference

Zenker, Frank LU (2006) In Journal for General Philosophy of Science 37(2). p.405-415
Abstract

Gerhard Schurz [2001, Journal for General Philosophy of Science, 32, 65-107] has proposed to reconstruct auxiliary hypothesis addition, e.g., postulation of Neptune to immunize Newtonian mechanics, with concepts from non-monotonous inference to avoid the retention of false predictions that are among the consequence-set of the deductive model. However, the non-monotonous reconstruction retains the observational premise that is indeed rejected in the deductive model. Hence, his proposal fails to do justice to Lakatos' core-belt model, therefore fails to meet what Schurz coined "Lakatos' challenge". It is argued that Lakatos's distinction between core and belt of a research program is not mapable onto premise-set and consequence-set and... (More)

Gerhard Schurz [2001, Journal for General Philosophy of Science, 32, 65-107] has proposed to reconstruct auxiliary hypothesis addition, e.g., postulation of Neptune to immunize Newtonian mechanics, with concepts from non-monotonous inference to avoid the retention of false predictions that are among the consequence-set of the deductive model. However, the non-monotonous reconstruction retains the observational premise that is indeed rejected in the deductive model. Hence, his proposal fails to do justice to Lakatos' core-belt model, therefore fails to meet what Schurz coined "Lakatos' challenge". It is argued that Lakatos's distinction between core and belt of a research program is not mapable onto premise-set and consequence-set and that Schurz's understanding of a ceteris paribus clause as a transfinite list of (absent) interfering factors is problematic. I propose a simple reading of Lakatos's use of the term ceteris paribus clause and motivate why the term hypothesis addition, despite not being interpretable literally, came to be entrenched. "It is not that we propose a theory and Nature may shout NO; rather we propose a maze of theories and Nature may shout INCONSISTENT." Lakatos (1978, p. 45).

(Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
organization
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
published
subject
keywords
Auxiliary hypothesis, Ceteris paribus clause, Deductive theory reconstruction, Non-monotonous reasoning, Theory immunization
in
Journal for General Philosophy of Science
volume
37
issue
2
pages
11 pages
publisher
Springer
external identifiers
  • scopus:33847282957
ISSN
0925-4560
DOI
10.1007/s10838-006-9010-9
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
fed213c3-35ca-4a94-8a56-32be57a36956
date added to LUP
2016-05-02 13:09:44
date last changed
2017-01-01 08:24:24
@article{fed213c3-35ca-4a94-8a56-32be57a36956,
  abstract     = {<p>Gerhard Schurz [2001, Journal for General Philosophy of Science, 32, 65-107] has proposed to reconstruct auxiliary hypothesis addition, e.g., postulation of Neptune to immunize Newtonian mechanics, with concepts from non-monotonous inference to avoid the retention of false predictions that are among the consequence-set of the deductive model. However, the non-monotonous reconstruction retains the observational premise that is indeed rejected in the deductive model. Hence, his proposal fails to do justice to Lakatos' core-belt model, therefore fails to meet what Schurz coined "Lakatos' challenge". It is argued that Lakatos's distinction between core and belt of a research program is not mapable onto premise-set and consequence-set and that Schurz's understanding of a ceteris paribus clause as a transfinite list of (absent) interfering factors is problematic. I propose a simple reading of Lakatos's use of the term ceteris paribus clause and motivate why the term hypothesis addition, despite not being interpretable literally, came to be entrenched. "It is not that we propose a theory and Nature may shout NO; rather we propose a maze of theories and Nature may shout INCONSISTENT." Lakatos (1978, p. 45).</p>},
  author       = {Zenker, Frank},
  issn         = {0925-4560},
  keyword      = {Auxiliary hypothesis,Ceteris paribus clause,Deductive theory reconstruction,Non-monotonous reasoning,Theory immunization},
  language     = {eng},
  number       = {2},
  pages        = {405--415},
  publisher    = {Springer},
  series       = {Journal for General Philosophy of Science},
  title        = {Lakatos's challenge? :  Auxiliary hypotheses and non-monotonous inference},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10838-006-9010-9},
  volume       = {37},
  year         = {2006},
}