34
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
no edit summary
<ref = Thermodynamics />
|Criticism=There were many criticism for the Duhem-Quine thesis and the Duhem thesis in general. Grünbaum believed there was no general argument to prove the existence of at least one other theory for any theory containing evidence.The main criticism was voiced by Larry Lauden in ''Demystifying Underdeterminism''. The idea was also repeated in the identical rivals objection.
The main argument is that in all the cases where there are seemingly endless theories that explain one theory and it's observations, (essentially in all instances of Quine's nonuniqueness thesis), the theories are actually the same but just formulated differently. <ref = "Demystifying Underdeterminism"> Laudan, Larry. 1990. Demystifying Underdetermination. In Scientific Theories, ed. C. WadeSavage, 267-297. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Reprinted in Philosophy ofScience. The Central Issues, ed. M. Curd and J. A. Cover, 320-353. New York: Norton,1998 </ref>
John Norton summarized this by saying "“The very fact that observational equivalence can be demonstrated by arguments brief enough to be included in a journal article means that we cannot preclude the possibility that the theories are merely variant formulations of the same theory.” <ref name = "John Norton"> Norton, John D. 2008. Must Evidence Underdetermine Theory? In The Challenge of the Social and
the Pressure of Practice: Science and Values Revisited, ed. M. Carrier, D. Howard, and J.
Kourany, 17-44. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press </ref>
}}
