Chalmers C4 and C5

What characterizes good inductive arguments

• the number of observations forming the basis of a generalisation must be large

• the observations must be repeated under a wide variety of conditions

• no accepted observation statement should conflict with the derived law

—> a good inductive argument does not jump to conclusions

What are problems with the characeterisation of induction?

• what is a large number of observations?

• what counts as a significant variation in circumstances?

• each inductive argument involves an appeal to prior knowledge, which needs an inductive argument to justify it

• little scientific knowledge would servive the demand that there be no known exceptions

What is criticism on inductivism

• it is not possbible to look at the observable

• all observations are subjet to some degree of error

• the attempt to justify indoction by an appeal to experience involves assuming what one is trying to prove

• there will always be an infinite number of hypotheses compatible with a finite amount of evidence

What is the difference between induction and deduction?

ISA and DAS

Which visionn do falsificationists have?

They admit that observation is guided by and presupposes theory and that they can't be established as true or probably true. According to them science does not involve induction. Instead of induction, falsificationists emphasize that science begins with problems and proposing falsifiable hypotheses as solutions. A theory is scientific if it can be contradicted in principle by observation.

What is said about theories by falsificationists

• it makes definite claims about the world

• the more a theory claims, the better because it is more fasifiable

• science progresses by trial and error

• science starts with problems

• there is a priority of thoeries over observation and observation statements