Alan Chalmers

960 Words2 Pages

Alan Chalmers has pointed out in the article that scientific knowledge can be confirmed by the fact that scientific theory comes from experience gained through observation and experimentation. Science is an objective phenomenon or rule, not a personal subjective point of view. The purpose of this article is to compare and discuss between Alan Chalmers’s emphases on science is Inductive Reasoning, and Karl Popper's hypothesis deduction. In short, the two contradictory theories of science, inductive reasoning and falsification will be mentioned, and I will focus on showing the relationship of these two theories.

At first, let me brief introduce the inductivist and falsificationsist accounts of scientific method. Inductive reasoning and deductive reasoning are both …show more content…

For the scientific evaluation, it should be a combination of the two. Inductive reasoning is inseparable from deductive reasoning. Firstly, in order to improve the reliability of inductive reasoning, we need to use the existing theoretical knowledge, the inductive reasoning of the individual premise analysis, grasp the causal, inevitability, which should put forward perjury. Secondly, the inductive reasoning relies on deductive reasoning to verify their conclusions. There is a good example here to show the combination of inductive reasoning and deductive reasoning. The Russian chemist Mendeleev discovered the elemental cycle law by induction, and pointed out that the nature of the element changes cyclically with the increase of elemental atomic weight. After the deductive reasoning found that the original measurement of some elements of the atomic weight is wrong. So he rescheduled their position in the periodic table and predicted some of the elements that had not yet been discovered, indicating that the periodic table should leave a blank position for new elements that were not

Open Document