Open AccessLogical theory revision through data underdetermination: an anti-exceptionalist exercise
Author(s) -
Sanderson Molick
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
principia
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
eISSN - 1808-1525
pISSN - 1414-4247
DOI - 10.5007/1808-1711.2021.e80110
Subject(s) - logical analysis , epistemology , divergence (linguistics) , non classical logic , underdetermination , logical consequence , perspective (graphical) , logical conjunction , logical data model , process (computing) , logical form , computer science , logical reasoning , cognitive science , philosophy of science , philosophy , psychology , artificial intelligence , mathematics , linguistics , data modeling , mathematical statistics , operating system , database , statistics
The anti-exceptionalist debate brought into play the problem of what are the relevant data for logical theories and how such data affects the validities accepted by a logical theory. In the present paper, I depart from Laudan's reticulated model of science to analyze one aspect of this problem, namely of the role of logical data within the process of revision of logical theories. For this, I argue that the ubiquitous nature of logical data is responsible for the proliferation of several distinct methodologies for logical theories. The resulting picture is coherent with the Laudanean view that agreement and disagreement between scientific theories take place at different levels. From this perspective, one is able to articulate other kinds of divergence that considers not only the inferential aspects of a given logical theory, but also the epistemic aims and the methodological choices that drive its development.