Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Laudan's Problem-Solving Model explicitly replaces truth-... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Without a viable notion of truthlikeness, retaining truth as the goal of inquiry makes partial progress towards it virtually impossible.

    Laudan's Problem-Solving Model explicitly replaces truth-approximation with empirical problem scope as the criterion of scientific progress.

    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Truth-approximation is metaphysically problematic and unobservable, while problem-solving scope is empirically measurable and pragmatically useful.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Science historically progressed by solving new empirical problems (disease, navigation, energy) rather than by approaching abstract metaphysical truth.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Problem-solving models avoid the pessimistic induction: past 'true' theories were later abandoned, but their problem-solving contributions endured.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Problem scope alone cannot explain why one theory solves problems better than another without invoking accuracy or truth-likeness as criteria.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A theory could expand problem scope through ad hoc auxiliary hypotheses while diverging from truth, making progress merely apparent, not genuine.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Laudan's model struggles to distinguish legitimate scientific progress from technologically useful but systematically false frameworks.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Connections

    2 topics

    Truth & Knowledge1 linkedSkepticism1 linked

    Related

    A theory could expand problem scope through ad hoc auxiliary hypotheses while di...Laudan's model struggles to distinguish legitimate scientific progress from tech...Problem scope alone cannot explain why one theory solves problems better than an...Problem-solving models avoid the pessimistic induction: past 'true' theories wer...
    +3 moreShow less
    Science historically progressed by solving new empirical problems (disease, navi...Truth-approximation is metaphysically problematic and unobservable, while proble...Without a viable notion of truthlikeness, retaining truth as the goal of inquiry...

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    2 (1 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit