Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Verisimilitude and the Dynamicsof Scientific Research Programmes

  • Published:
Journal for General Philosophy of Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Some peculiarities of the evaluation of theories within scientific research programmes (SRPs) and of the assessing of rival SRPs are described assuming that scientists try to maximise an ‘epistemic utility function’ under economic and institutional constraints. Special attention is given to Lakatos' concepts of ‘empirical progress’ and ‘theoretical progress’. A notion of ‘empirical verisimilitude’ is defended as an appropriate utility function. The neologism ‘methodonomics’ is applied to this kind of studies.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  • Balzer, W., Moulines, C. U. and Sneed, J.: 1987, An Architectonic for Science, Reidel, Dordrecht.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Howson, C. and Urbach, P.: 1989, Scientific Reasoning. The Bayesian Approach, Open Court, La Salle (Ill.).

    Google Scholar 

  • Kieseppä, I. A.: 1996, ‘On the Aim of the Theory of Verisimilitude’, Synthese 107, 421–438.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kitcher, P.: 1993, The Advancement of Science, Oxford University Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, T. S.: 1962, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuipers, T. (ed.): 1987, What is closer-to-the-truth?, Rodopi, Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuipers, T.: 1991, ‘Revisiting the Hypothetico-Deductive Method’, Acta Philosophica Groningana 3.

  • Lakatos, I.: 1978, ‘Falsification and the Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes’, in I. Lakatos, The Methodology of Scientific Research Programmes. Philosophical Papers. Vol. 1, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Niiniluoto, I.: 1984, Is Science Progressive?, Reidel, Dordrecht.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Niiniluoto, I.: 1987, Truthlikeness, Reidel, Dordrecht.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Popper, K. R.: 1962, ‘Truth, Rationality and the Development of Knowledge’, in Conjectures and Refutations, Routledge, London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zamora Bonilla, J. P.: 1992, ‘Truthlikeness Without Truth: A Methodological Approach’, Synthese 93, 343–372.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zamora Bonilla, J. P.: 1996a, Mentiras a medias (in Spanish), Ediciones de la Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Madrid.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zamora Bonilla, J. P.: 1996b, ‘Verisimilitude, Structuralism and Scientific Progress’, Erkenntnis 44, 25–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zamora Bonilla, J. P.: 1999, ‘The Elementary Economics of Scientific Consensus’, Theoria 14.3, 461–88.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zamora Bonilla, J. P.: 2000, ‘Truthlikeness, Rationality and Scientific Method’, Synthese 122, 321–35. Departamento de Lógica y Filosofía de la Ciencia Facultad de Filosofía U.N.E.D. 28040 Madrid (Spain) (jpzb@urrutiaelejalde.org)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Departamento de Lógica y Filosofía de la CienciaFacultad de Filosofía, U.N.E.D., 28040, Madrid, Spain

    Jesús P. Bonilla

Authors
  1. Jesús P. Bonilla
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bonilla, J.P. Verisimilitude and the Dynamicsof Scientific Research Programmes. Journal for General Philosophy of Science 33, 349–368 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022415606099

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022415606099

Search

Navigation