Stack Exchange
open access
CC BY-SA
What basis do we have for certainty in current scientific theories?
Given there is much past scientific belief that we now know NOT to be true, what basis do we have for the seemingly increasing certainty in our scientific beliefs held today being true? On the one hand, we prize Popperian falsifiability and yet still have a sense that we can be quite certain of some things scientifically. I am thinking less about approximations such as Newtonian mechanics (which, even in light of relativity or quantum mechanics, is still useful) and more like phlogiston theory or Aristotelean physics. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obsolete_scientific_theory for a decent list.
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- Extensional Scientific Realism vs. Intensional Scientific Realism#759016
- From Nothing to Everything#697015
- Karl Popper: Philosophy of Science#767548
- Retention Myths vs. Well-Managed Resources: Promises and Failings of Structural Realism (2014)#719266
- Why is it rational to believe scientific theories are true?#85201
Record · ID 787615
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive