|Hypotheses: Hypotheses are assumptions made before performing experiments to compare the results of these experiments with them. Hypotheses must be fed by a given theory that is at least rudimentary, which determines what belongs to the domain of the objects involved, the concepts used and the possible consequences, and what cannot belong to it. In the course of the theory formation there is a mutual correction of assumptions and test results and the set of concepts and sentences of the theory. See also theories, methods, verification._____________Annotation: The above characterizations of concepts are neither definitions nor exhausting presentations of problems related to them. Instead, they are intended to give a short introduction to the contributions below. – Lexicon of Arguments. |
W. Poundstone on Hypotheses - Dictionary of Arguments
Hypotheses/Poundstone: most are generalizations - Nicods criterion (Raven paradox): Relevance - black and non-black non-ravens are irrelevant.
I 60 Poundstone: even observing black ravens is virtually irrelevant - I 88 poor hypoth. spoil good supporting evidence.
Auxiliary hypotheses/Coherence theory/Poundstone: additional hypotheses usually areassumptions about the functioning of the instruments - problem: often the applicability of the modus tollens is not guaranteed - E.g. Uranus was correctly predicted due to perturbations, Neptune wrongly predicted based on the same assumptions and methods._____________Explanation of symbols: Roman numerals indicate the source, arabic numerals indicate the page number. The corresponding books are indicated on the right hand side. ((s)…): Comment by the sender of the contribution. Translations: Dictionary of Arguments The note [Author1]Vs[Author2] or [Author]Vs[term] is an addition from the Dictionary of Arguments. If a German edition is specified, the page numbers refer to this edition.
Labyrinths of Reason, NY, 1988
Im Labyrinth des Denkens Hamburg 1995