Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes.¶
Lakatos, I. (1970). Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes. Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge.
Cited by¶
3 citations across 3 artifacts.
Each citation links to the sentence it supports in the citing article.
Primes¶
- Open-Closed Principle
- In the philosophy of science, Lakatosian research programmes protect a "hard core" of irrevocable assumptions behind a "protective belt" of auxiliary hypotheses where revision absorbs anomalies.
This sourceDistinguishes an irrevocable 'hard core' protected by a revisable 'protective belt' of auxiliary hypotheses that absorbs anomalies.
- In the philosophy of science, Lakatosian research programmes protect a "hard core" of irrevocable assumptions behind a "protective belt" of auxiliary hypotheses where revision absorbs anomalies.
- Unfalsifiability
- A claim that solicits the deference owed to empirically answerable statements, whether or not its holder would describe it that way. An observation space both parties treat as relevant, so the failure is not merely that the claim addresses some other subject. A defeat region that is empty, never articulated, or articulated only in terms the holder alone is positioned to adjudicate. Revision triggered asymmetrically: the rule is reopened after disappointing results and left alone after flattering ones. Rescues that are not independently checkable, each introduced because a refuter appeared rather than because a defect was diagnosed on separate grounds. Unlimited and costless confirmation, in which every outcome, including opposite outcomes, is narrated as support. No growth in exclusion over time: after many encounters with evidence, the claim rules out no more than it did at the start.
This sourceRequires each successive theory in a programme to carry excess empirical content predicting novel facts and some of that content to be corroborated, and makes the unit of appraisal the series rather than any single theory at a single moment.
- A claim that solicits the deference owed to empirically answerable statements, whether or not its holder would describe it that way. An observation space both parties treat as relevant, so the failure is not merely that the claim addresses some other subject. A defeat region that is empty, never articulated, or articulated only in terms the holder alone is positioned to adjudicate. Revision triggered asymmetrically: the rule is reopened after disappointing results and left alone after flattering ones. Rescues that are not independently checkable, each introduced because a refuter appeared rather than because a defect was diagnosed on separate grounds. Unlimited and costless confirmation, in which every outcome, including opposite outcomes, is narrated as support. No growth in exclusion over time: after many encounters with evidence, the claim rules out no more than it did at the start.
Domain-specific¶
- Special Pleading
- Religious apologetics — home-tradition miracles exempted from a skepticism applied to rival traditions' claims. Political rhetoric — the resignation or conduct standard demanded of opponents but waived for one's own side. Legal argument — a precedent distinguished away from the case at hand without the distinguishing rule being stated. Moral reasoning — universalist principles invoked generally but exempted for the in-group. Philosophy of science — Popper's "conventionalist twist" and Lakatos's "degenerating problem shift," where a failed prediction is rescued by exempting the failed instance from the theory's scope, the same ad-hoc-exemption aimed at the falsifiability norm.
This sourceLakatos's distinction between progressive and degenerating problemshifts, under which saving a theory by inadmissible ad hoc auxiliary hypotheses is degeneration, the term 'conventionalist stratagem' being credited to Popper.
Supported in partVerified against a saved copy of the source
“saving a theory with the help of auxiliary hypotheses which do not, represents degeneration. Popper calls such inadmissible auxiliary hypotheses ad hoc hypotheses, mere linguistic devices, 'conventionalist stratagems'.”
- Religious apologetics — home-tradition miracles exempted from a skepticism applied to rival traditions' claims. Political rhetoric — the resignation or conduct standard demanded of opponents but waived for one's own side. Legal argument — a precedent distinguished away from the case at hand without the distinguishing rule being stated. Moral reasoning — universalist principles invoked generally but exempted for the in-group. Philosophy of science — Popper's "conventionalist twist" and Lakatos's "degenerating problem shift," where a failed prediction is rescued by exempting the failed instance from the theory's scope, the same ad-hoc-exemption aimed at the falsifiability norm.
Verification¶
Does it exist? Confirmed. This work's DOI resolves to a registered record, which fixes its identity. That is all it fixes.
Does it back the claim? Read against the text for 1 of 3 citations: 1 supported in part. Each verdict is shown under its citation below, with what in the work backs the sentence.
Support is checked per citation rather than per work — the same source can be cited soundly in one article and wrongly in another. Per-citation recording began recently, so a citation with no recorded check is a gap in the record rather than evidence it went unchecked.
See how references were verified.
Registry ID ref:d84e0ad61a43 · see in the full table