Detail príspevku/publikácie

Abstrakt

This paper compares several definitions of argument in the field of logic and argumentation theory in order to identify those defining features that are reflected in the notion of argument in the field of philosophy of science. An argument in philosophy of science has a standard structure that includes a non-empty set of premises and a conclusion, between which there is a relation of deductive or non-deductive (typically probabilistic) support, whereby disregarding the user of the argument does not affect the methodological function of the argument. The core of the study shows that argument in philosophy of science can be used to model explanation, prediction, and also as a tool for problem identification, a means of both justifying and criticizing a particular thesis, a model for testing and evaluating hypotheses, and as a tool for distinguishing between different methodological approaches.