Hypothetico-deductivism in systematics: fact or fiction?

Papéis Avulsos de Zoologia (São Paulo)

Olivier Rieppel¹ 

[1] ,The Field Museum Department of Geology Chicago Illinois ,USA

关键词: Hempel;    Popper;    cladistics;    hypothetico-deductivism;    total evidence;    relevant evidence;    Hempel;    Popper;    cladística;    hipotético-dedutivismo;    evidência total;    evidência relevante;   

DOI  :  10.1590/S0031-10492008002300001

来源: SciELO

【 摘 要 】

Phylogenetic systematics (the cladistic analysis of phylogenetic relationships) is not hypotheticodeductively structured (in the sense of a covering law model of scientific explanation). If it were, there would be no reason to call for total evidence, since that requirement is automatically satisfied in a deductively structured explanation. Instead, the appeal to the requirement of total evidence in phylogenetic systematics indicates that phylogenetic inference is inductively, or abductively, structured. The principle of total evidence has been invoked to render inductive inference an argument as strong as it can be, but for this to be the case the total evidence must also be relevant evidence, i.e., evidence 'of the right sort' relative to the state of affairs to be explained. Character congruence is a necessary condition for phylogenetic inference, but not also a sufficient condition. What is required in addition is the causal grounding of character statements in theories of inheritance, development and function.

【 授权许可】

CC BY   
 All the contents of this journal, except where otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License