(2010) Synthese 177 (1).
This paper argues that Duhem’s thesis does not decisively refute a corroboration-based account of scientific methodology (or ‘falsificationism’), but instead that auxiliary hypotheses are themselves subject to measurements of corroboration which can be used to inform practice. It argues that a corroboration-based account is equal to the popular Bayesian alternative, which has received much more recent attention, in this respect.
Publication details
DOI: 10.1007/s11229-009-9643-4
Full citation:
Rowbottom, D. P. (2010). Corroboration and auxiliary hypotheses: Duhem's thesis revisited. Synthese 177 (1), pp. 139-149.
This document is unfortunately not available for download at the moment.