Duhem–Quine thesis

Shish0r - JovianLabbeled (by-sa)

Galileantelescope 2

Sidereus Nuncius sickle moon

Duhem–Quine thesis posits that it is impossible to test a scientific hypothesis in isolation because an empirical test of the hypothesis requires one or more background assumptions (also known as auxiliary assumptions or auxiliary hypotheses). This concept is named after the French physicist Pierre Duhem and the American philosopher Willard Van Orman Quine, who both contributed to its formulation. The thesis is a significant point of discussion in the philosophy of science, particularly concerning the underdetermination of theories by empirical evidence.

Overview

The Duhem–Quine thesis argues that for any empirical observation, multiple explanations can be posited. Therefore, when an experiment contradicts a theory, it may not necessarily refute the theory directly but could instead call into question any of the theory's associated assumptions. This presents a challenge for the falsification criterion of scientific theories proposed by Karl Popper, which suggests that theories can be conclusively falsified by empirical evidence.

Implications

The implications of the Duhem–Quine thesis are far-reaching in the philosophy of science. It complicates the process of theory testing by suggesting that no single hypothesis can be tested in isolation. This has led to discussions on the holistic nature of testing in science, where a group of hypotheses rather than a single hypothesis is put to the test. It also raises questions about the criteria for theory choice, suggesting that extra-scientific factors such as aesthetic qualities or simplicity may play a role in theory selection.

Criticism

Critics of the Duhem–Quine thesis argue that it overstates the problem of underdetermination and that scientists can often devise experiments that effectively isolate hypotheses for testing. They also point out that the thesis does not necessarily lead to relativism or skepticism about scientific knowledge, as it is still possible to make rational theory choices based on empirical evidence.

See Also

• Philosophy of science
• Falsifiability
• Empirical evidence
• Underdetermination
• Scientific method