Počet záznamov: 1
Why the objectivist interpretation of falsification matters
SYS 0232181 005 20240513140459.4 014 $a 000378650500001 $2 CCC 014 $a 000378650500001 $2 WOS CC. SSCI 014 $a 000378650500001 $2 WOS CC. AHCI 014 $a 2-s2.0-84973535602 $2 SCOPUS 017 70
$a 10.1177/0048393116643486 $2 DOI 100 $a 20160809 2016 m y slo 03 ba 101 0-
$a eng 102 $a US 200 1-
$a Why the objectivist interpretation of falsification matters $f Miloš Taliga 330 $a The article distinguishes between subjectivist and objectivist interpretations of scientific method, links subjectivism with good reasons, and argues its uselessness for our understanding of science. It applies the distinction to the method of falsification, explains why objectivism regards falsification to be conjectural, immune to the Duhem-Quine thesis, and immune to the problem of underdetermination. It confronts the falsifying mode of inference with the fallacy of begging the question and with the paradox of inference, and suggests how modus tollens helps scientists to find out that a tested theory is false, in spite of the fact that the falsity of the theory is asserted in its premises. 463 -1
$1 001 umb_un_cat*0295212 $1 011 $a 0048-3931 $1 011 $a 1552-7441 $1 200 1 $a Philosophy of the Social Sciences $v Vol. 46, no. 4 (2016), pp. 335-351 $1 210 $a Thousand Oaks $c SAGE Publications $d 2016 606 0-
$3 umb_un_auth*0000511 $a filozofia $X philosophy 606 0-
$3 umb_un_auth*0055065 $a vedecké metódy 606 0-
$3 umb_un_auth*0038365 $a logika $X logic 606 0-
$3 umb_un_auth*0149736 $a scientific methods 615 $n 1 $a Filozofia 675 $a 1 700 -1
$3 umb_un_auth*0084654 $a Taliga $b Miloš $p UMBFF10 $9 100 $f 1977- $4 070 $T Katedra filozofie 801 -0
$a SK $b BB301 $g AACR2 $9 unimarc sk T85 $x existuji fulltexy
Počet záznamov: 1