To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
This chapter contrasts the theory of singular compositional abduction with the “matched interlevel experiments” approach by Carl Craver, Stuart Glennan, and Mark Povich. The Craver, Glennan, and Povich account does not apply to the interpretation cases of “intralevel” experiments. It only applies to “interlevel” experiments. Further, it does not leave room for the scientific use of combinations of interlevel and intralevel experiments in support of compositional hypotheses. The chapter also sketches an account of “interlevel abduction” that might serve as a rival to the matched interlevel experiments interpretation. The chapter also reviews suggestions that the matched interlevel experiments approach is not meant to be an account of how scientists actually confirm compositional hypotheses. A challenge for these suggestions is why a historian and philosopher of science should care about a method that is not used by scientists.
Abductive reasoning is a form of inference that infers some hypothesis because of what that hypothesis explains. Unlike deductive reasoning, it yields a plausible conclusion but does not definitively verify it. The theory of compositional abduction developed in this book provides a novel theory of confirmation. Aizawa uses case studies to analyse how scientists interpret the results of experiments to support compositional hypotheses (hypotheses about what things are composed of) and suggests that they use a kind of abduction. His theory is offered as an alternative account of scientific reasoning that the logical empiricists would have interpreted as hypothetico-deductive confirmation. It is also an alternative to the Peircean interpretation of the role of abduction in science. It will be valuable to philosophers of science, those working on hypothetico-deductive confirmation, Peirce's view of abduction, inference to the best explanation, and the New Mechanism. This title is also available as Open Access on Cambridge Core.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.