Is Theory Choice Using Epistemic Virtues Possible?

2017 ◽  
pp. 139-168
Author(s):  
Kit Patrick ◽  
Kate Hodesdon
Keyword(s):  
Theory Choice ◽  
Epistemic Virtues ◽  
Is Theory

Confirmational Holism and Theory Choice: Arrow Meets Duhem

Mind ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 129 (513) ◽  
pp. 71-111 ◽  
Author(s):  
Eleonora Cresto ◽  
Diego Tajer
Keyword(s):  
Theory Choice ◽  
Impossibility Theorem ◽  
Arrow’S Theorem ◽  
Epistemic Virtues ◽  
Evidence Amalgamation ◽  
Arrow's Impossibility Theorem ◽  
Arrow's Theorem ◽  
The One ◽  
Different Sources ◽  
Positive Light

Abstract In a recent paper Samir Okasha has suggested an application of Arrow’s impossibility theorem to theory choice. When epistemic virtues are interpreted as ‘voters’ in charge of ranking competing theories, and there are more than two theories at stake, the final ordering is bound to coincide with the one proposed by one of the voters (the dictator), provided a number of seemingly reasonable conditions are in place. In a similar spirit, Jacob Stegenga has shown that Arrow’s theorem applies to the amalgamation of evidence; the ‘voters’ here are the different sources of evidence. As with Okasha’s proposal, it is not clear how to avoid Arrow’s pessimistic conclusion. In this paper we develop a novel argument that purports to show that, in typical examples, Arrow’s result does not obtain when dealing with evidence amalgamation. The reason is that we cannot escape the well-known Duhem problem: the evidence actually confirms (or disconfirms) complex conjunctions that include various auxiliary hypotheses. We argue that confirmational holism induces us to restrict the domain of a reasonable amalgamation function, thus violating one of Arrow’s conditions. The upshot is that we are now able to see the Duhem problem under a different, positive light – namely, as a phenomenon that makes the aggregation of the evidence possible in the first place, when there are at least three options on the table.

Theory Programs and Theoretical Problems

2005 ◽  
Vol 23 (2) ◽  
pp. 127-155 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph Berger ◽  
David Willer ◽  
Morris Zelditch
Keyword(s):  
Sociological Theory ◽  
Empirical Models ◽  
Theory Choice ◽  
Theoretical Research ◽  
Sufficient Condition ◽  
Research Programs ◽  
Is Theory ◽  
The Creation ◽  
The Right

Some sociologists argue that sociological theory does not grow and the reason why it does not grow is that the discipline lacks a core of highly developed, almost universally accepted, paradigms; even worse, because it is reflexive, its criteria of problem and theory choice are so noncognitive that there are no paradigms, hence no progress, in its future. We do not question that sociology lacks a core of almost universally accepted paradigms, nor that highly developed paradigms may be a sufficient condition of theory growth, but we question both that universal acceptance of them is necessary and that sociology has nothing like them. We argue that theoretical research programs—sets of strategies, sets of interrelated theories embodying these strategies, and empirical models interpreting these theories—are sufficient for theoretical growth. An examination of three theoretical research programs in this article shows that they perform some of the same functions for theory growth as, in Kuhn, are performed by paradigms. Sociology may lack a universally accepted core, but there are theoretical research programs in sociology, and therefore already there is theory growth if it is looked for in the right place. Nor is there any warrant for the view that because its criteria of problem and theory choice are inescapably noncognitive, there are no paradigms, hence no progress, in sociology's future. If that were true, not only would sociology lack paradigms, but also theoretical research programs. We conclude from our study that sociology need not wait on the emergence of a universally accepted core. It is sufficient for the growth of theory that it develops further its existing theoretical research programs and that it encourages the creation of new programs.

IS THEORY SINE QUA NON?

1961 ◽  
Vol 6 (8) ◽  
pp. 287-287
Author(s):  
BURTON G. ANDREA
Keyword(s):  
Is Theory

Corporate Governance and Performance of Organizations

2018 ◽  
Vol 9 (5) ◽  
pp. 439-446
Author(s):  
Hamid Ait lemqeddem ◽  
◽  
Mounya Tomas ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Corporate Governance ◽  
Agency Theory ◽  
Theoretical Foundation ◽  
Quantitative Approach ◽  
Governance Practices ◽  
Deductive Method ◽  
Private And Public ◽  
Is Theory ◽  
And Performance ◽  
Do So

There is renewed interest in the need to focus on corporate governance in an environment where it is a performance imperative for all small and large organizations, private and public, beginner or established.The purpose of this study is to demonstrate the place of corporate governance practices in organizations to ensure that the board, officers, and directors take action to protect shareholder interests and all stakeholders. It is important to focus on the effect of these practices on improving performance and competitiveness. To do so, we opted for the hypothetico-deductive method with a quantitative approach. Our theoretical foundation is theory is agency theory.

Middle School Students with Exceptional Learning Needs Investigate the Use of Visuals for Learning Science

2012 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Robin Ward McCartney ◽  
Donna Dugger Wadsworth
Keyword(s):  
Students With Disabilities ◽  
Learning Needs ◽  
Evidence Based ◽  
School Students ◽  
Construction Of Knowledge ◽  
Personal Perceptions ◽  
Is Theory ◽  
Visual Graphic ◽  
Enhanced Learning ◽  
Positive Results

A visual instructional tool that is theory-driven and supported by evidence-based research is used to support student learning and information-processing. The graphic organizer has enhanced learning in Science Education as well as Special Education, emphasizing the construction of knowledge with meaningful sequential relationships rather than memorizing isolated fragments of information. Students construct a visual schema that represents a system of interrelated concepts and icons created by the learner. This article provides a description of a qualitative application of how students with disabilities are able to represent their ideas by assimilating subject matter and their personal perceptions of content by drawing pictures connected to concepts within the visual graphic. Positive results were documented in this study.

Is Theory Useful for Conflict Prediction? A Response to Beger, Morgan, and Ward

2021 ◽  
pp. 002200272110267
Author(s):  
Robert A. Blair ◽  
Nicholas Sambanis
Keyword(s):  
Civil Wars ◽  
Performance Metrics ◽  
Value Added ◽  
Roc Curves ◽  
Conflict Escalation ◽  
Original Analysis ◽  
Is Theory ◽  
A Minor ◽  
Conflict Prediction ◽  
Technical Question

Beger, Morgan, and Ward (BM&W) call into question the results of our article on forecasting civil wars. They claim that our theoretically-informed model of conflict escalation under-performs more mechanical, inductive alternatives. This claim is false. BM&W’s critiques are misguided or inconsequential, and their conclusions hinge on a minor technical question regarding receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves: should the curves be smoothed, or should empirical curves be used? BM&W assert that empirical curves should be used and all of their conclusions depend on this subjective modeling choice. We extend our original analysis to show that our theoretically-informed model performs as well as or better than more atheoretical alternatives across a range of performance metrics and robustness specifications. As in our original article, we conclude by encouraging conflict forecasters to treat the value added of theory not as an assumption, but rather as a hypothesis to test.

scholarly journals Realism and the Epistemic Objectivity of Science

2021 ◽  
Vol 35 (1) ◽  
pp. 5-20
Author(s):  
Howard Sankey
Keyword(s):  
Scientific Theory ◽  
Theory Choice ◽  
Relative Significance

Abstract The paper presents a realist account of the epistemic objectivity of science. Epistemic objectivity is distinguished from ontological objectivity and the objectivity of truth. As background, T.S. Kuhn’s idea that scientific theory-choice is based on shared scientific values with a role for both objective and subjective factors is discussed. Kuhn’s values are epistemologically ungrounded, hence provide a minimal sense of objectivity. A robust account of epistemic objectivity on which methodological norms are reliable means of arriving at the truth is presented. The problem remains that deliberative judgement is required to determine the relevance and relative significance of a range of methodological norms. A role is sketched for cognitive virtues which may be exercised in the course of the deliberative judgement.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document