ABSTRACT

Inductivism is the claim that induction is the basis of proper scientific inquiry. Induction holds that we can infer that what we know to be true in a particular case or cases will be true in all cases, which resemble the former in certain assignable respects. Sequel to this claim, John Stuart Mill, one of the major proponents of inductivism rejected every rationalistic or idealistic approach to scientific knowledge; instead, he suggested experience as the basis for any knowledge that is worthwhile. The history of philosophy has been characterized by arguments and counter arguments on what should constitute the nature of scientific methodology and this has led to absolutism in science that is, the belief that scientists must adhere to some stipulated methods. This work employs critical method, functional analysis and hermeneutical method to appraise the above stated claim by first of all establishing the roles played by the human reason and a priori ideas in the scientific enterprise. After this, we will also examine issues surrounding the methodology of science as raised by philosophers of science like Popper, Kuhn, Lakatos, and Feyerabend etc. consequently; we will conclude that science has more to do with pragmatism via relativism which can be certified by some landmark achievements in the history of science.

CHAPTER ONE

1.1 Background of Study

The history of science has been characterized by some sort of absolutism and consistency ranging from inductivism to hypotheticodeductive methods. Induction is generally referred to as a method of reasoning from a part to a whole, from particular to generals, or from the individual to the universal1. Many scholars consider this method of inference as the foundation of the scientific ingenuities and sequel to this; science is taken as an ideology. Therefore, any discipline that does not concur to this scientific method is always labeled a counterideology.

In consonance with the above claim, any knowledge that does not have recourse to ordinary sense experience is considered meaningless.

In the light of the above, we shall start by beaming our search light on foundational absolutism in science: Inductivism with J.S. Mill who holds that the true test of logic is experience. He rejected the argument of the rationalists and the Aristotelians who argued that beyond our ordinary experience of things we have intuitions rational intuitions of ontological connections that structure things in ways not apparent to our ordinary sense experience of the world. ...Get Complete Material.