Annals of the Japan Association for Philosophy of Science
Online ISSN : 1884-1228
Print ISSN : 0453-0691
ISSN-L : 0453-0691
Volume 7 , Issue 2
Showing 1-4 articles out of 4 articles from the selected issue
  • Koji NAKATOGAWA
    1987 Volume 7 Issue 2 Pages 57-71
    Published: March 05, 1987
    Released: February 16, 2009
    JOURNALS FREE ACCESS
    Download PDF (869K)
  • Toshiharu WARAGAI
    1987 Volume 7 Issue 2 Pages 73-84
    Published: March 05, 1987
    Released: March 31, 2009
    JOURNALS FREE ACCESS
    Download PDF (454K)
  • Gerard RADNITZKY
    1987 Volume 7 Issue 2 Pages 85-99
    Published: March 05, 1987
    Released: March 31, 2009
    JOURNALS FREE ACCESS
    What may be gained by applying cost-benefit analysis (‘CBA’ for short) to methodological problems? It is claimed that the perspective of CBA may help the researcher to see what sorts of questions he should take into account when dealing with particular methodological problems. This claim is supported by applying CBA-thinking to two standard problems of the philosophy of science.
    In section 1 the concepts of “economic approach” and of “methodology” are clarified. Section 2 is devoted to the problem of the empirical base. In the practice of research the handling of basic statements seldom, if ever, constitutes a problem, and no conscious decision is involved. In the methodological reconstruction of that practice the problem of the empirical ‘base’ is viewed as an investment problem: whether or not to invest time and effort into processing a particular basic statement into a falsifying hypothesis for the theory we wish to test. The valuation of the costs of rejecting or, as the case may be, of defending a basic statement, are objective. Section 3 deals with the problem of theory choice. In basic science the issue is not one of acceptance or rejection of a single theory, but rather of theory preference. Both the rational response to a falsification and rational theory preference are governed by CBA-considerations. The option for one of two competing theories is based upon a CBA where the valuation of benefits and costs is objective. Theory change is an objective process, at least in those fields where theorizing is closely monitored by empirical testing: in the long run the better theory drives out the less good theory. The costs of defending a theory that is less good than its competitor are mainly opportunity costs, epistemic resources forgone.
    Download PDF (907K)
  • Yoichiro P. MURAKAMI
    1987 Volume 7 Issue 2 Pages 101-110
    Published: 1987
    Released: October 22, 2010
    JOURNALS FREE ACCESS
    Download PDF (506K)
feedback
Top