Why Should the Logic of Discovery Be Revived? A Reappraisal

Chapter
First Online:
Part of the Studies in Applied Philosophy, Epistemology and Rational Ethics book series (SAPERE, volume 16)

Abstract

Three decades ago Laudan posed the challenge: Why should the logic of discovery be revived? This paper tries to answer this question arguing that the logic of discovery should be revived, on the one hand, because, by Gödel’s second incompleteness theorem, mathematical logic fails to be the logic of justification, and only reviving the logic of discovery logic may continue to have an important role. On the other hand, scientists use heuristic tools in their work, and it may be useful to study such tools systematically in order to improve current heuristic tools or to develop new ones. As a step towards reviving the logic of discovery, the paper follows Aristotle in asserting that logic must be a tool for the method of science, and outlines an approach to the logic of discovery based on the analytic method and on ampliative inference rules.

Keywords

Mathematical Logic Inference Rule Synthetic Method Heuristic Procedure Incompleteness Theorem 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgments

I am very grateful to Atocha Aliseda and Thomas Nickles for comments on an earlier draft of the manuscript.

References

  1. 1.
    Planck, M.: Scientific Autobiography and Other Papers. Williams & Norgate, London (1950)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Einstein, A.: Ideas and Opinions. Crown Publishers, New York (1954)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Einstein, A.: Induction and deduction in physics. In: Einstein, A. (ed.) Collected Papers, vol. 7, pp. 108–109. Princeton University Press, Princeton (2002)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Reichenbach, H.: The Rise of Scientific Philosophy. University of California Press, Berkeley (1951)MATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Reichenbach, H.: The Theory of Probability: An Inquiry into the Logical and Mathematical Foundations of the Calculus of Probability. University of California Press, Berkeley (1949)MATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Novalis (von Hardenberg, Friedrich): Notes for a romantic encyclopedia. Das Allgemeine Brouillon. In: Wood DW (ed.) State University of New York Press, Albany (2007)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cellucci, C.: Romanticism in mathematics. Newslett. HPM Group 64, 17–19 (2007)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lakatos, I.: Proofs and Refutations: The Logic of Mathematical Discovery. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1976)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cellucci, C.: Top-down and bottom-up philosophy of mathematics. Found. Sci. 18, 93–106 (2013)CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lakatos, I.: Philosophical papers. In: Worrall, J., Currie, G. (eds.) Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1978)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bacon, F.: Works. ed. In: Spedding, J., Ellis, R.L., Heath, D.D. (eds.) Frommann Holzboog, Stuttgart Bad Cannstatt (1961–1986)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Descartes, R.: Œuvres. In: Adam, C., Tannery, P (eds.). Vrin, Paris (1996)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Blanché, R.: La logique et son histoire, d’Aristote à Russell. Armand Colin, Paris (1970)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Frege, G.: The Foundations of Arithmetic: A Logico-Mathematical Enquiry into the Concept of Number. Blackwell, Oxford (1959)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Frege, G.: Posthumous writings. In: Hermes, H., Kambartel, F., Kaulbach, F. (eds.). Blackwell, Oxford (1979)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Frege, G.: Collected papers on mathematics, logic, and philosophy. McGuinness, B. (ed.). Blackwell, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Cellucci, C.: Rethinking Logic. Logic in Relation to Mathematics, Evolution, and Method. Springer, Berlin (2013)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hilbert, D.: Grundlagen der Geometrie. In: Hallett, M., Majer, U. (eds.) David Hilbert’s Lectures on the Foundations of Geometry (1891–1902), pp. 540–606. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2004)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hilbert, D.: On the concept of number. In: Ewald, W.B. (ed.) From Kant to Hilbert: A Source Book in the Foundations of Mathematics, II edn, pp. 1092–1095. Oxford University Press, Oxford (1996)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hilbert, D.: Letter to Frege 29.12.1899. In: Gabriel, G., Hermes, H., Kambartel, F. (eds.) Gottlob Frege: Philosophical and Mathematical Correspondence, pp. 38–41. Blackwell, Oxford (1980)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hilbert, D.: Axiomatic thought. In: Ewald, W.B. (ed.) From Kant to Hilbert: a source book in the foundations of mathematics, II edn, pp. 1107–1115. Oxford University Press, Oxford (1996)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Poincaré, H.: Science and Method. Nelson, London (1914)MATHGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Tarski, A.: Introduction to logic and to the methodology of deductive sciences. Tarski, J. (ed.). Oxford University Press, Oxford (1994)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Aliseda, A.: Abductive Reasoning: Logical Investigations into Discovery and Explanations. Springer, Berlin (2006)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Laudan, L.: Why Was the logic of discovery abandoned? In: Nickles, T. (ed.) Scientific Discovery, Logic, and Rationality, pp. 173–183. Reidel, Dordrecht (1980)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Machado, A.: Border of a dream: selected poems. In: Barnstone, W. (ed.). Copper Canyon Press, Port Townsend (2004)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Boger, G.: Aristotle’s underlying logic. In: Gabbay, D.M., Woods, J. (eds.) Handbook of the History of Logic: Greek, Indian and Arabic logic, vol. 1, pp. 101–246. Elsevier, Amsterdam (2004)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Galileo, G.: Opere. In: Favaro, A. (ed.). Barbera, Florence (1968)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Newton, I.: Opticks, or a Treatise of the Reflections, Refractions, Inflections & Colours of Light. Dover, Mineola (1952)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Cohen, I.B.: Introduction to Newton’s ‘Principia’. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1971)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Ribet, K.A.: From the Taniyama-Shimura conjecture to fermat’s last theorem. Annales de la Faculté des Sciences de Toulouse—Mathématiques 11, 116–139 (1990)CrossRefMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Morris, R.C., Nagel, E.: An Introduction to Logic and Scientific Method. Routledge, London (1964)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Peirce, C.S.: Collected papers. In: Hartshorne, C., Weiss, P., Burks, A.W. (eds.). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1931–1958)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Frankfurt, H.G.: Peirce’s notion of abduction. J. Philos. 55, 593–597 (1958)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Peirce, C.S.: Reasoning and the logic of things. In: Ketner KL (ed.). Harvard University Press, Cambridge (1992)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Popper, K.: The Logic of Scientific Discovery. Routledge, London (2005)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Popper, K.: Realism and the aim of science. In: Bartley WW (ed.), III. Routledge, London (2000)Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Popper, K.: Conjectures and Refutations: The Growth of Scientific Knowledge. Routledge, London (1974)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Davis, P.J.: Mathematics and Common Sense: A Case of Creative Tension. A K Peters, Natick (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Kant, I.: Prolegomena to Any Future Metaphysics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Russell, B.: An Outline of Philosophy. Routledge, London (1995)Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Pólya, G.: Mathematics and Plausible Reasoning. Princeton University Press, Princeton (1954)Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Hempel, C.G.: Philosophy of Natural Science. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River (1966)Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Girard, J.Y.: Le champ du signe ou la faillite du réductionnisme. In: Nagel, E., Newman, J.R., Gödel, K., Girard, J.Y. (eds.) Le théorème de Gödel, pp. 147–171. Éditions du Seuil, Paris (1989)Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Gillies, D.: Artificial Intelligence and Scientific Method. Oxford University Press, Oxford (1996)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Sapienza University of RomeRomeItaly

Personalised recommendations