Corroboration and auxiliary hypotheses : Duhem's thesis revisited

Research output: Journal PublicationsJournal Article (refereed)peer-review

13 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This paper argues that Duhem’s thesis does not decisively refute a corroboration-based account of scientific methodology (or ‘falsificationism’), but instead that auxiliary hypotheses are themselves subject to measurements of corroboration which can be used to inform practice. It argues that a corroboration-based account is equal to the popular Bayesian alternative, which has received much more recent attention, in this respect.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)139-149
Number of pages11
JournalSynthese
Volume177
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Nov 2010
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • Confirmation
  • Corroboration
  • Duhem's thesis
  • Falsificationism
  • Popper
  • Quine-Duhem thesis

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Corroboration and auxiliary hypotheses : Duhem's thesis revisited'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this