Reasoning with False Evidence

Among philosophers of science today, the following two assumptions are quite uncontroversial. First, empirical evidence is fallible and many of our present and past empirical beliefs are or were false. Second, our ability to correctly infer the truth or falsity of a hypothesis depends on the correctness of our evidence set. Based on these two assumptions, the question arises as to how scientists can reason with false evidence and reliably infer hypotheses.

Corinna Günth
Corinna Günth
[Alumni] PhD student