On the Methods of Science

Abstract

A number of writers, most of them long dead, have held that science proceeds by the “Inductive Method.” Very roughly, according to this method, we are to begin our investigations with the observation and collection of facts; then, by comparing those facts, and perhaps applying to them certain rules of reasoning, we are to arrive at scientific hypotheses, theories, and/or explanations. According to some versions of the Method, no further stages need be undergone, as the methods give proof of the conclusion; newer versions insist that proof is not given by inductive reasoning, that only probability is. Some newer versions also suppose a third stage, the testing of the hypothesis arrived at. Again, different variants disagree as to what that testing can do. According to some versions, it will produce evidence that will either verify or falsity (or confirm or disconfirm) the conclusion arrived at in Stage 2; for others, only falsification is possible. These differences, and indeed, all specific variants, will be irrelevant for the present discussion, except insofar as they are used as illustrative examples. Only the core version of the approach, according to which the first stage of scientific investigation is the collection of facts or data, will be relevant.