Advertisement

Theory Building as Problem Solving

  • Carlo CellucciEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Studies in Applied Philosophy, Epistemology and Rational Ethics book series (SAPERE, volume 41)

Abstract

After giving arguments against the claim that the so-called Big Data revolution has made theory building obsolete, the paper discusses the shortcomings of two views according to which there is no rational approach to theory building: the hypothetico-deductive view and the semantic view of theories. As an alternative, the paper proposes the analytic view of theories, illustrating it with some examples of theory building by Kepler, Newton, Darwin, and Bohr. Finally, the paper examines some aspects of the view of theory building as problem solving.

Keywords

Theory building Big data revolution Analytic view of theories Novelty of non-deductive rules Plausibility Problem solving 

Notes

Acknowledgements

I wish to thank Reuben Hersh and an anonymous reviewer for their comments and suggestions.

References

  1. Anderson, C. (2008). The end of theory: The data deluge makes the scientific method obsolete. Wired Magazine, 23 June. https://www.wired.com/2008/06/pb-theory/.
  2. Bacon, F. (1961–1986). Works. Stuttgart–Bad Cannstatt: Frommann Holzboog.Google Scholar
  3. Berman, J. (2013). Principles of big data: Preparing, sharing, and analyzing complex information. Amsterdam: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  4. Bohr, N. (1913). On the constitution of atoms and molecules. Philosophical Magazine 26, 1–25, 476–502, 857–875.Google Scholar
  5. Bohr, N. (1963). Essays 1958–1962 on atomic physics and human knowledge. New York: Interscience Publishers.Google Scholar
  6. Calude, C. S., & Longo, G. (2016). The deluge of spurious correlations in big data. Foundations of Science.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10699-016-9489-4.Google Scholar
  7. Capozzi, M. (2013). Kant e la logica I. Naples: Bibliopolis.Google Scholar
  8. Cellucci, C. (2013). Rethinking logic: Logic in relation to mathematics, evolution, and method. Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cellucci, C. (2017). Rethinking knowledge: The heuristic view. Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Darwin, C. (1903). More letters of Charles Darwin. London: Murray.Google Scholar
  11. Darwin, C. (2009a). The origin of species by means of natural selection. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Darwin, C. (2009b). The life and letters of Charles Darwin, including an autobiographical chapter. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Einstein, A. (2002). Induction and deduction in physics. In Collected papers (Vol. 7, pp. 108–109). Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Einstein, A. (2010). Ideas and opinions. New York: Crown.Google Scholar
  15. Frege, G. (1960). The foundations of arithmetic: A logico-mathematical enquiry into the concept of number. New York: Harper.Google Scholar
  16. Frege, G. (1967). Begriffsschrift, a formula language, modeled upon that of arithmetic, for pure thought. In J. van Heijenoort (Ed.), From Frege to Gödel: A source book in mathematical logic, 1879–1931. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Hempel, C. G. (1966). Philosophy of natural science. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  18. Hempel, C. G. (2001). The philosophy of Carl G. Hempel: Studies in science, explanation, and rationality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Kant, I. (1992). Lectures on logic. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kepler, J. (1981). Mysterium Cosmographicum. New York: Abaris Books.Google Scholar
  21. Kepler, J. (1992). New astronomy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Laudan, L. (1977). Progress and its problems. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  23. Laudan, L. (1981). Science and hypothesis: Historical essays on scientific methodology. Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Malle, J.-P. (2013). Big data: Farewell to Cartesian thinking? Paris Innovation Review, 15 March. http://parisinnovationreview.com/articles-en/big-data-farewell-to-cartesian-thinking.
  25. Newton, I. (1999). The Principia: Mathematical principles of natural philosophy. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  26. Prawitz, D. (2014). The status of mathematical knowledge. In E. Ippoliti & C. Cozzo (Eds.), From a heuristic point of view (pp. 73–90). Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
  27. Pólya, G. (1941). Heuristic reasoning and the theory of probability. The Americal Mathematical Monthly, 48, 450–465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Pólya, G. (1954). Mathematics and plausible reasoning. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Pólya, G. (1971). How to solve it: A new aspect of mathematical method. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Popper, K. R. (2005). The logic of scientific discovery. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  31. Siegfried, T. (2013). Rise of big data underscores need for theory. Science News, 3 December. https://www.sciencenews.org/blog/context/rise-big-data-underscores-need-theory.
  32. Striker, G. (2009). Commentary. In Aristotle, Prior analytics, Book I (pp. 67–246). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  33. Turing, A. M. (2004a). Systems of logic based on ordinals. In B. J. Copeland (Ed.), The essential Turing (pp. 146–204). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Turing, A. M. (2004b). Letter to Max Newman, 21 April 1940. In B. J. Copeland (Ed.), The essential Turing (pp. 211–213). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  35. van Fraassen, B. (1980). The scientific image. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. van Fraassen, B. (1985). Empiricism in the philosophy of science. In P. Churchland & C. Hooker (Eds.), Images of science: Essays on realism and empiricism (pp. 245–308). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  37. van Fraassen, B. (1989). Laws and symmetry. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. van Fraassen, B. (2000). The false hopes of traditional epistemology. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 60, 253–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. van Fraassen, B. (2008). Scientific representation: Paradoxes of perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Sapienza University of RomeRomaItaly

Personalised recommendations