Abstract
Abstract I investigate Heger and Jeschke's account of hierarchies of hypotheses (HoHs) from a philosophy of science perspective. HoHs can be theory driven or evidence driven. Theory-driven HoHs fit well with standard representations of hierarchical theory nets (HTNs) in the philosophy of science. A disadvantage of the development of theory-driven HoHs is that they neglect hypotheses describing the effects of combinations of causes; this disadvantage can be removed by adding an additional layer of system conditions. Evidence-driven HoHs additionally include kinds of empirical tests by means of which certain hypotheses in the HoH are tested. This aspect of HoHs goes beyond standard HTNs in the philosophy of science and is highly fruitful; however, it leads to certain problems concerning the relation between causal hypotheses and empirically testable correlation claims.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
