more on this theme | more from this thinker
Full Idea
There is no sense in abandoning a successful theory if you have nothing to replace it with.
Gist of Idea
Why abandon a theory if you don't have a better one?
Source
Geoffrey Gorham (Philosophy of Science [2009], 2)
Book Ref
Gorham,Geoffrey: 'Philosophy of Science' [One World 2009], p.38
A Reaction
This is also a problem for infererence to the best explanation. What to do if your best explanation is not very good? The simple message is do not rush to dump a theory when faced with an anomaly.
| 22189 | Why abandon a theory if you don't have a better one? [Gorham] |
| 22190 | If a theory is more informative it is less probable [Gorham] |
| 22196 | For most scientists their concepts are not just useful, but are meant to be true and accurate [Gorham] |
| 22192 | Is Newton simpler with universal simultaneity, or Einstein simpler without absolute time? [Gorham] |
| 22194 | Structural Realism says mathematical structures persist after theory rejection [Gorham] |
| 22195 | Structural Realists must show the mathematics is both crucial and separate [Gorham] |
| 22197 | Theories aren't just for organising present experience if they concern the past or future [Gorham] |
| 22193 | Consilience makes the component sciences more likely [Gorham] |
| 22198 | Aristotelian physics has circular celestial motion and linear earthly motion [Gorham] |