Carnap versus Popper: What scientists actually do

Keywords: confirmation, mental models, possibilities, conditional reasoning, falsifiability

Abstract

Carnap and Popper proposed ways scientists have to work. According to Carnap, they should look for confirmations for hypotheses. In Popper‘s view, what is important is to try to falsify hypotheses. Cognitive science seems to prove that, in real scientific research, both activities play a role. First, people attempt to confirm hypotheses. Second, they seek examples refuting those hypotheses. This paper is intended to show that the theory of mental models can describe the mental processes involved in both tasks: confirmation and falsification. It addresses the mental possibilities individuals consider in both cases. In addition, the paper reveals that, in accordance with both Carnap‘s framework and Popper‘s approach, both mental activities are related to conditional reasoning.

Más información

Título de la Revista: Logos and Episteme. An International Journal of Epistemology
Volumen: 14
Número: 2
Editorial: Gheorghe Zane Institute for Economic and Social Research, Romanian Academy, Iasi Branch
Fecha de publicación: 2023
Página de inicio: 131
Página final: 139
Idioma: English
Financiamiento/Sponsor: PIA Ciencias Cognitivas, Centro de Investigación en Ciencias Cognitivas, Instituto de Estudios Humanísticos, Universidad de Talca; Fondo Fondecyt de Continuidad para Investigadores Senior, código FCSEN2102, Universidad de Talca; Fondequip (Programa de Equ
URL: https://doi.org/10.5840/logos-episteme202314210
DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5840/logos-episteme202314210

Notas: SCOPUS