Simplicity in science

Abstract

This dissertation investigates the possibility of justifying simplicity principles in science. The labor of these projects is organized into three chapters. The first chapter introduces some of the key authors and issues in the history of simplicity in science. This chapter also gives a detailed discussion of the work of the 19th century physicists Le Verrier and Newcomb who played a crucial role in setting the stage for Einstein's theory of relativity. These examples are used to illustrate points in the following chapters. However, they play a specific role in the first chapter to show serious problems with a view defended by an important contemporary author, Richard Swinburne, that one version of the principle of parsimony contributes to the probability that scientific theories will be true. The second chapter elucidates the problems involved in specifying and measuring the simplicity of scientific hypotheses and theories. When simplicity criteria are employed in a scientific methodology, we find that simplicity judgments of one kind are always traded-off with simplicity judgments of another kind. We also find that the scientific project involves a delicate balancing of several aims. This analysis renders a valuable result: that some dogmas, in particular, the dogma that principles of parsimony are the final court of appeal in scientific theory selection must be jettisoned. I also find that it is misguided to ask the question of whether or not simplicity of some clearly specified kind is related to the truth. In point of fact, the legitimate questions about the justification of specific simplicity judgments in science are much more complex and nuanced than this. This becomes clear when it is seen exactly how different simplicity criteria are related to one another and to the various desiderata of science. The third chapter investigates which argument forms may be available to justify simplicity principles in science. In some cases it is nonsense to ask the question of how simplicity is related to the truth. However, we can investigate the forms of various arguments that may be given to justify methodological principles involving simplicity criteria. The results from the second chapter are employed in two ways. First, methodological principles stand in a tight-knit set of interrelations, so our analysis of justificatory argument forms must incorporate the complexity of these relations. Second, simplicity is extremely heterogeneous and since no conceptual reduction of all of the various simplicity criteria is possible, justificatory arguments must deal with clusters of interrelated principles. This result may have certain advantages and other disadvantages for inductive, transcendental, or inference to the best explanation approaches to the justification of simplicity. My analysis shows what will and what will not work for these possible approaches to the question of justification and shows what some of the systematic and metaphilosophical commitments would have to be were philosophers to pursue this project.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 90,616

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

  • Only published works are available at libraries.

Similar books and articles

What is the problem of simplicity?Elliott Sober - 2001 - In Arnold Zellner, Hugo A. Keuzenkamp & Michael McAleer (eds.), Simplicity, Inference and Modelling: Keeping It Sophisticatedly Simple. New York: Cambridge University Press. pp. 13-32.
Simplicity in the Best Systems Account of Laws of Nature.James Woodward - 2014 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 65 (1):91-123.
The simplicity of theories: Its degree and form. [REVIEW]James W. McAllister - 1991 - Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 22 (1):1-14.
A neglected proposal concerning simplicity.Robert Ackermann - 1963 - Philosophy of Science 30 (3):228-235.
Simplicity.Elliott Sober - 1975 - Oxford: Clarendon Press.
The deadlock of absolute divine simplicity.Yann Schmitt - 2013 - International Journal for Philosophy of Religion 74 (1):117-130.
Science, computers, and the complexity of nature.Peter Caws - 1963 - Philosophy of Science 30 (2):158-164.
Simplicity.Nicholas Maxwell - 2000 - Philsci Archive.

Analytics

Added to PP
2013-10-24

Downloads
15 (#809,217)

6 months
1 (#1,040,386)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Daniel Schulz
University of Iowa

Citations of this work

Simple is not easy.Edison Barrios - 2016 - Synthese 193 (7):2261-2305.

Add more citations

References found in this work

The best explanation: Criteria for theory choice.Paul R. Thagard - 1978 - Journal of Philosophy 75 (2):76-92.
Epistemology in the Age of Neuroscience.Patricia Smith Churchland - 1987 - Journal of Philosophy 84 (10):544-553.
Simplicity As Evidence of Truth.Richard Swinburne - 1997 - Milwaukee: Marquette University Press.

Add more references