共查询到20条相似文献,搜索用时 0 毫秒
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
This paper describes an argumentative fallacy we call ‘Retroductive Analogy.’ It occurs when the ability of a favored hypothesis
to explain some phenomena, together with the fact that hypotheses of a similar sort are well supported, is taken to be sufficient
evidence to accept the hypothesis. This fallacy derives from the retroductive or abductive form of reasoning described by
Charles Sanders Peirce. According to Peirce’s account, retroduction can provide good reasons to pursue a hypothesis but does
not, by itself, provide good reasons to believe the hypothesis. In successful applications of retroduction, pursuit leads
to the accumulation of evidence. In retroductive analogy, comparison with other successful hypotheses is substituted for the
genuine pursuit of evidence. We describe a case from ecological genetics in which retroduction plays a legitimate role as
the initial phase of an ongoing research program that serves to accumulate genuine evidence for a hypothesis. We also examine
two contexts in which the fallacy of retroductive analogy occurs: in defenses of Intelligent Design Theory and in defense
of some hypotheses in Evolutionary Psychology. 相似文献
18.
19.