Philosophic Versus Scientific Views of Scientific Evidence
The philosophical community has investigated the logical requirements for scientific evidence by examination of the relationship between evidence and hypotheses, in contrast to scientific approaches which focus on the candidate facts and their context. Bechtel, as an example of a scientific approach, provides factors (clarity of the data, replication by others, consistency with results arrived at by alternative methods and consistency with plausible theories) useful for determination of whether observations may be considered scientific evidence.
There are a variety of philosophical approaches to decide whether an observation may be considered evidence; many of these focus on the relationship between the evidence and the hypothesis. Carnap recommends distinguishing such approaches into three categories: classificatory (whether the evidence confirms the hypothesis), comparative (whether the evidence supports a first hypothesis more than an alternative hypothesis) or quantitative (the degree to which the evidence supports a hypothesis). Achinstein provides a concise presentation by prominent philosophers on evidence, including Carl Hempel (Confirmation), Nelson Goodman (of grue fame), R. B. Braithwaite, Norwood Russell Hanson, Wesley C. Salmon, Clark Glymour and Rudolf Carnap
Based on the philosophical assumption of the Strong Church-Turing Universe Thesis, a mathematical criterion for evaluation of evidence has been proven, with the criterion having a resemblance to the idea of Occam's Razor that the simplest comprehensive description of the evidence is most likely correct. It states formally, "The ideal principle states that the prior probability associated with the hypothesis should be given by the algorithmic universal probability, and the sum of the log universal probability of the model plus the log of the probability of the data given the model should be minimized."
Read more about this topic: Scientific Evidence
Famous quotes containing the words philosophic, scientific, views and/or evidence:
“If we are to take for the criterion of truth the majority of suffrages, they ought to be gotten from those philosophic and patriotic citizens who cultivate their reason.”
—James Madison (1751–1836)
“If a man is a good lawyer, a good physician, a good engineer ... he may be a fool in every other capacity. But no deficiency or mistake of judgment is forgiven to a woman ... and should she fail anywhere, if she has any scientific attainment, or artistic faculty, instead of standing her interest as an excuse, it is censured as an aggravation and offence.”
—E.P.P., U.S. women’s magazine contributor. The Una, p. 28 ( February 1855)
“A foreign minister, I will maintain it, can never be a good man of business if he is not an agreeable man of pleasure too. Half his business is done by the help of his pleasures: his views are carried on, and perhaps best, and most unsuspectedly, at balls, suppers, assemblies, and parties of pleasure; by intrigues with women, and connections insensibly formed with men, at those unguarded hours of amusement.”
—Philip Dormer Stanhope, 4th Earl Chesterfield (1694–1773)
“In spite of the air of fable ... the public were still not at all disposed to receive it as fable. I thence concluded that the facts of my narrative would prove of such a nature as to carry with them sufficient evidence of their own authenticity.”
—Edgar Allan Poe (1809–1849)