The working of a deductive theory in science. Image from Physics for the Inquiring Mind by Eric Rogers. Though many philosophers of science would disagree with this view, one can surely start with this.
The working of a deductive theory in science. Image from Physics for the Inquiring Mind by Eric Rogers. Though many philosophers of science would disagree with this view, one can surely start with this.
This is with reference to the poster on “Deductive Theory in Science”.
I think what is shown is not deduction but induction – or maybe a combination of induction and deduction. The word “observation” is not used, but it is obviously implied, because the “experimental information” is based on observation. What are “facts” but observations? Experimental tests require observation of physical reality. The difference between inductive reasoning and decutive reasoning is that inductive reasoning is based on observation. Actually, science cannot be done without inductive reasoning. So I find the terminology in the poster misleading since it downplays the role of observation and doing, and exagerateds the role of ‘thinking’.