Mohammad Mahdi Sadrforati; Shadi Mohammadi
Abstract
Having ‘good sense’ in choosing among rival scientific theories was initially introduced by Pierre Duhem. According to him, where empirical evidence and logical rules cannot help to choose among scientific options, scientists need a further criterion to help them decide. However, Duhem left ...
Read More
Having ‘good sense’ in choosing among rival scientific theories was initially introduced by Pierre Duhem. According to him, where empirical evidence and logical rules cannot help to choose among scientific options, scientists need a further criterion to help them decide. However, Duhem left this notion undeveloped and open for further discussions to find its nature and the way it works. This paper starts with evaluating David Stump’s and Milena Ivanova’s accounts, two major scholars in this debate. Having considered the cons and pros of each account, we will come up with a social understanding of ‘good sense’, according to which this notion is characterized by the way successful scientists actually theorize and practice science and the community of scientists accepts them.
