SCIENCE AS SUCCESSFUL PREDICTION:“Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Program
PROFILE (November 9, 1922 – February 2, 1974) born Imre (Avrum) Lipsitz to a Jewish family in Debrecen, Hungary was a philosopher of mathematics and science received a degree in mathematics, physics, and philosophy from the University of Debrecen in 1944 He became an active communist during the Second World War He changed his last name once again to Lakatos (Locksmith) in honor of Géza Lakatos
After the Soviet Union invaded Hungary in November 1956, Lakatos fled to Vienna, and later reached England. He received a doctorate in philosophy in 1961 from the University of Cambridge. The book Proofs and Refutations: The Logic of Mathematical Discovery, published after his death, is based on this work. Lakatos never obtained British Citizenship, in effect remaining stateless.
For Centuries, Knowledgemeant Proven Knowledge.
Popper- Falsifiability Method - virtue lies not in caution inavoiding errors, but in ruthlessnessin eliminating them (Freudan andMarxist Errors) - Belief may be a regrettablyunavoidable biological weakness tobe kept under the control ofcriticism. - Commitment is forPopper, an outright crime.
Kuhn Popper Revolution is exceptional, extra- •Revolution is scientific permanence Criticism is, in normal times, anathema. •Criticism is the heart Transition from of the scientific Criticism to Commitment marks the enterprise point where progress •“Logic of Discovery” and normal science begins. New Theories only emerge where ``crisis`` begins ``Psychology of Discovery`` Truth lies on power Religious Change
Fallabilism vs. Falsificationism Sophisticated versus NaiveMethodological Falsificationism.Progressive and Degenerating Problemshifts
Sophisticated versus Naive Methodological Falsificationism.Differs from its rules of acceptance (demarcation criterion) and its rules of falsification or elimination
Naive SophisticatedFalsificationist Falsificationist Any theory which can be • A theory is interpreted as "acceptable" or experimentally falsifiable, is "acceptable" "scientific" only if it has or "scientific." corroborated excess empirical content over its predecessor (or rival), that is, only if it leads to the discovery of novel facts.
• This condition can be analyzed into two clauses: that the new theory has excess empirical content ("acceptability"1) and that some of this excess empirical content is verified ("acceptability"2). The first clause can be checked instantly by a priori logical analysis; the second can be checked only empirically and this may take an indefinite time.
A theory • regards a scientific is falsified by a theory T as "(fortified) falsified if and only observational" if another statement which theory T has been conflicts with it (or proposed with the rather, which he decides to following interpret as characteristics: conflicting with it).
(1) T has excess empirical content over T: that is, it predicts novel facts, that is, facts improbable in the light of, or even forbidden, by T,(2) T explains the previous success of T, that is, all the unrefuted content of T is contained (within the limits of observational error) in the content of T; and(3) some of the excess content of T is corroborated.
Excess Empirical Content New PROGRESSIVE (or constitutes a Fact!! theoretically progressive problemshiftEMPIRICALLYPROGRESSIVE (or constitutes an empirically progressive problemshift
PROBLEMSHIFT Progressive if both empirically and theoretically progressive Accept if they are at least theoretically progressive “FALSIFIED” “Degenerating” if it is not. “Reject” if not and termed as “Pseudoscience.” Progress is measured by the degree to which a problemshift is progressive, by the degree to which the series of theories leads us to the discovery of novel facts. We regard a theory in the series "falsified" when it is superseded by a theory with higher corroborated content.
A given fact is explainedscientifically only if a new fact s also explained with it.
SophisticatedFalsificationism Only a series of theories can be said to be scientific or unscientific: to apply Theories them the term "scientific" toTheories one single theory is a category mistake. Theories
Revised MethodologicalFalsificationism Features: it denies that "in the case of a scientific theory, our decision depends upon the result of experiments. It denies that "what ultimately decides the fate of a theory is the result of the test, i.e., an agreement about basic statements. Contrary to naive falsificationism, no experiment, experimental report, observation statement or well-corroborated low-level falsifying hypothesis alone can lead to falsification. There is no falsification before the emergence of a better theory.
Falsification can thus be said to have a "historical character.” Some of the theories which bring about falsification are frequently proposed after the "counterevidence."
Thus the crucial element in falsificationism is whether the new theory offers any novel, excess information compared with its predecessor andwhether some of thisexcess information is corroborated.
Methodological FasificationistThe rather rare excess information which are the crucial ones receives the attention.
Falsification in the Sense of naivefalsificationism Not sufficient condition for eliminating a specific theory Falsification is not necessary for Sophisticated Falsification: a progressive problemshift does not have to be interspersed with ‘refutations.’
Sophisticated Falisificationism“Proliferation of theories” is importantStresses that the urgency of replacing any hypothesis by a better one.
THE POPPERIANVERSUS THE KUHNIANRESEARCH PROGRAM
KUHN In Kuhn’s view there can be no logic, but only psychology of discovery. Scientific revolution is irrational, matter of mob psychology.