Why the pessimistic induction is a fallacy

Peter Lewis

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

38 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Putnam and Laudan separately argue that the falsity of past scientific theories gives us reason to doubt the truth of current theories. Their arguments have been highly influential, and have generated a significant literature over the past couple of decades. Most of this literature attempts to defend scientific realism by attacking the historical evidence on which the premises of the relevant argument are based. However, I argue that both Putnam's and Laudan's arguments are fallacious, and hence attacking their premises is unnecessary. The paper concludes with a discussion of the further historical evidence that would be required if the pessimistic induction is to present a serious threat to scientific realism.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)371-380
Number of pages10
JournalSynthese
Volume129
Issue number3
StatePublished - Dec 2001

Fingerprint

induction
realism
evidence
threat
literature
Pessimistic Induction
Fallacies
Scientific Realism
Historical Evidence

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Social Sciences(all)

Cite this

Lewis, P. (2001). Why the pessimistic induction is a fallacy. Synthese, 129(3), 371-380.

Why the pessimistic induction is a fallacy. / Lewis, Peter.

In: Synthese, Vol. 129, No. 3, 12.2001, p. 371-380.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Lewis, P 2001, 'Why the pessimistic induction is a fallacy', Synthese, vol. 129, no. 3, pp. 371-380.
Lewis P. Why the pessimistic induction is a fallacy. Synthese. 2001 Dec;129(3):371-380.
Lewis, Peter. / Why the pessimistic induction is a fallacy. In: Synthese. 2001 ; Vol. 129, No. 3. pp. 371-380.
@article{7ee70b1b406641e1beac9b935d895b92,
title = "Why the pessimistic induction is a fallacy",
abstract = "Putnam and Laudan separately argue that the falsity of past scientific theories gives us reason to doubt the truth of current theories. Their arguments have been highly influential, and have generated a significant literature over the past couple of decades. Most of this literature attempts to defend scientific realism by attacking the historical evidence on which the premises of the relevant argument are based. However, I argue that both Putnam's and Laudan's arguments are fallacious, and hence attacking their premises is unnecessary. The paper concludes with a discussion of the further historical evidence that would be required if the pessimistic induction is to present a serious threat to scientific realism.",
author = "Peter Lewis",
year = "2001",
month = "12",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "129",
pages = "371--380",
journal = "Synthese",
issn = "0039-7857",
publisher = "Springer Netherlands",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Why the pessimistic induction is a fallacy

AU - Lewis, Peter

PY - 2001/12

Y1 - 2001/12

N2 - Putnam and Laudan separately argue that the falsity of past scientific theories gives us reason to doubt the truth of current theories. Their arguments have been highly influential, and have generated a significant literature over the past couple of decades. Most of this literature attempts to defend scientific realism by attacking the historical evidence on which the premises of the relevant argument are based. However, I argue that both Putnam's and Laudan's arguments are fallacious, and hence attacking their premises is unnecessary. The paper concludes with a discussion of the further historical evidence that would be required if the pessimistic induction is to present a serious threat to scientific realism.

AB - Putnam and Laudan separately argue that the falsity of past scientific theories gives us reason to doubt the truth of current theories. Their arguments have been highly influential, and have generated a significant literature over the past couple of decades. Most of this literature attempts to defend scientific realism by attacking the historical evidence on which the premises of the relevant argument are based. However, I argue that both Putnam's and Laudan's arguments are fallacious, and hence attacking their premises is unnecessary. The paper concludes with a discussion of the further historical evidence that would be required if the pessimistic induction is to present a serious threat to scientific realism.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=4043129042&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=4043129042&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:4043129042

VL - 129

SP - 371

EP - 380

JO - Synthese

JF - Synthese

SN - 0039-7857

IS - 3

ER -