Discovery and Ampliative Inference
- 1 September 1989
- journal article
- Published by University of Chicago Press in Philosophy of Science
- Vol. 56 (3) , 438-462
- https://doi.org/10.1086/289500
Abstract
An inference to a new explanation may be both logically non-ampliative and epistemically ampliative. Included among the premises of the latter form is the explanandum—a unique premise which is capable of embodying what we do not know about the matter in question, as well as legitimate aspects of what we do know. This double status points to a resolution of the Meno paradox. Ampliative inference of this sort, it is argued, has much in common with Nickles' idea of discoverability and, together with the mapping and correction procedures (briefly summarized) required for such inference, may suggest a broadening of the concept of justification which would incorporate much of what has been defended in theories of discovery.Keywords
This publication has 16 references indexed in Scilit:
- Beyond Divorce: Current Status of the Discovery DebatePhilosophy of Science, 1985
- Assimilation and discoveryNew Ideas in Psychology, 1983
- What is a problem that we may solve it?Synthese, 1981
- The Logic of InventionPublished by Springer Nature ,1980
- Why was the Logic of Discovery Abandoned?Published by Springer Nature ,1980
- Can Scientific Constraints be Violated Rationally?Published by Springer Nature ,1980
- Introductory Essay: Scientific Discovery and the Future of Philosophy of SciencePublished by Springer Nature ,1980
- Bradie on Polanyi on the Meno ParadoxPhilosophy of Science, 1976
- Does Scientific Discovery Have a Logic?Philosophy of Science, 1973
- The Inference to the Best ExplanationThe Philosophical Review, 1965