structure for 'Science'    |     alphabetical list of themes    |     unexpand these ideas

14. Science / A. Basis of Science / 5. Anomalies

[observations which contradict current theories]

7 ideas
If the apparent facts strongly conflict with probability, it is in everyone's interests to suppress the facts [Plato]
     Full Idea: There are some occasions when both prosecution and defence should positively suppress the facts in favour of probability, if the facts are improbable.
     From: Plato (Phaedrus [c.366 BCE], 272e)
Inductive generalisation is more reliable than one of its instances; they can't all be wrong [Mill]
     Full Idea: A general proposition collected from particulars is often more certainly true than any one of the particular propositions from which, by an act of induction, it was inferred. It might be erroneous in any instance, but cannot be erroneous in all of them.
     From: John Stuart Mill (System of Logic [1843], 4.1.2), quoted by Peter Lipton - Inference to the Best Explanation (2nd) 11 'The scientific'
     A reaction: One anomaly can be ignored, but several can't, especially if the anomalies agree.
We can save laws from counter-instances by treating the latter as analytic definitions [Harré]
     Full Idea: When we come upon a counter-instance to a generalisation we can save the putative law, by treating it as potentially analytic and claiming it as a definition. ...Thus magnetism doesn't hold for phosphorus, so we say phosphorus is not a magnetic substance.
     From: Rom Harré (Laws of Nature [1993], 3)
     A reaction: He notes this as being particularly true when the laws concern the dispositions of substances, rather than patterns of events.
The anomaly of Uranus didn't destroy Newton's mechanics - it led to Neptune's discovery [Newton-Smith]
     Full Idea: When scientists observed the motion of Uranus, they did not give up on Newtonian mechanics. Instead they posited the existence of Neptune.
     From: W.H. Newton-Smith (The Rationality of Science [1981], III.9)
Anomalies are judged against rival theories, and support for the current theory [Newton-Smith]
     Full Idea: Whether to reject an anomaly has to be decided on the basis of the availability of a rival theory, and on the basis of the positive evidence for the theory in question.
     From: W.H. Newton-Smith (The Rationality of Science [1981], III.9)
All theories contain anomalies, and so are falsified! [Newton-Smith]
     Full Idea: According to Feyerabend all theories are born falsified, because no theory has ever been totally free of anomalies.
     From: W.H. Newton-Smith (The Rationality of Science [1981], III.9)
Anomalies challenge the claim that the basic explanations are actually basic [Bonjour]
     Full Idea: The distinctive significance of anomalies lies in the fact that they undermine the claim of the allegedly basic explanatory principles to be genuinely basic.
     From: Laurence Bonjour (The Structure of Empirical Knowledge [1985], 5.3)
     A reaction: This seems plausible, suggesting that (rather than an anomaly flatly 'falsifying' a theory) an anomaly may just demand a restructuring or reconceptualising of the theory.