Inconsistency in Science; an Argument for the Possibility of the Paraconsistent Philosophy of Science

Document Type : Original Research

Author
K. Farsian
Deptartment of Philosophy and Logic, Faculty of Humanities, Tarbiat Modares University, Tehran, Iran
10.58209/jpt.2.3.269
Abstract
According to some important philosophers of science, such as Popper, Hempel and Tarski, consistency is a necessary condition of establishing any scientific theory. They hold that all inconsistent scientific theories are uninformative, meaningless or deficient. In this paper I will first argue against their clams, then I consider some inconsistencies which happened at the heart of some well-accepted scientific theories (Empirical or Non-Empirical), and by this I will try to open the door for the possibility of the paraconsistent philosophy of science.

Keywords

  1. - Aristotle, (1984). The Complete Works of Aristotle: The Revised Oxford Translation. Princeton: Princeton University Press, vols 1 and 2.
    - Davey, K. (2014). Can good science be logically inconsistent?. Synthese 191, 3009–3026. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-014-0470-x.
    - Farsian K, Hodjati S. (2021). Graham Priest on Reconstruction of Hegel’s Logic and Metaphysics in Modern Logic. jpt. 2021; 1 (1) :61-77. URL: http://jpt.modares.ac.ir/article-34-45297-fa.html.[Persian]
    - Farsian, K. (2020). Reconstruction of Hegel's Logic through the Modern Logic: Paraconsistency or Trivialism?. Logical Studies, 11(2), 173-188. doi: 10.30465/lsj.2021.35739.1338.[Persian]
    - Hempel, C., Jeffrey, R. (2000). Selected philosophical essays. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
    - Mortensen, C. (2017).Inconsistent Mathematics, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2017 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2017/entries/mathematics-inconsistent/>.
    - Popper, K. (2002). The logic of scientific discovery. London: Routledge.
    - Priest, G. (1998). What is so Bad about Contradictions? The Journal of Philosophy, 95(8), 410–426. https://doi.org/10.2307/2564636
    - Priest, G. (2002). Inconsistency and the Empirical Sciences. In: Meheus, J. (eds) Inconsistency in Science. Origins, vol 2. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-0085-6_7.
    - Priest, G., Routley, R. (1984). Introduction: Paraconsistent logics. Studia Logica 43, 3–16. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00935736.
    - Tarski, A. (1994). Introduction to Logic and to the Methodology of the Deductive Sciences. New York: Oxford University Press.
  2. Aristotle (1984). The complete works of Aristotle: The revised Oxford translation. Princeton: Princeton University Press. [Link]
  3. Brady RT (1971). The consistency of the axioms of abstraction and extensionality in a three-valued logic. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic. 12(4):447-453. [Link] [DOI:10.1305/ndjfl/1093894366]
  4. Brady RT (1989). The nontriviality of dialectical set theory. In: Priest G, Routley R, Norman J, editors. Paraconsistent Logic: Essays on the Inconsistent. Munich: Philosophia Verlag. pp. 437-470. [Link] [DOI:10.2307/j.ctv2x8v8c7.19]
  5. Brady R (2006). Universal Logic. Stanford: CSLI Publications. [Link]
  6. da Costa NCA (1974). On the theory of inconsistent formal systems. Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic. 15(4):497-510. [Link] [DOI:10.1305/ndjfl/1093891487]
  7. Davey K (2014). Can good science be logically inconsistent?. Synthese. 191(13):3009-3026. [Link] [DOI:10.1007/s11229-014-0470-x]
  8. Farsian K, Hodjati S. (2021). Graham Priest on reconstruction of Hegel's logic and metaphysics in modern logic. Journal o Philosophical Thought. 1(1):61-77. [Persian] [Link]
  9. Farsian K (2020). Reconstruction of Hegel's logic through the modern logic: Paraconsistency or trivialism?. Logical Studies. 11(2):173-188. [Persian] [Link]
  10. Hempel C, Jeffrey R (2000). Selected philosophical essays. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [Link] [DOI:10.1017/CBO9780511815157]
  11. Mortensen C (1995). Inconsistent mathematics. Dordrecht: Springer. [Link] [DOI:10.1007/978-94-015-8453-1]
  12. Mortensen C (2017). Inconsistent mathematics (August 18, 2017). In: Zalta EN, editor. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Available from: https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2017/entries/mathematics-inconsistent/ [Link]
  13. Popper K (2002). The logic of scientific discovery. London: Routledge. [Link]
  14. Priest G (1998). What is so bad about contradictions?. The Journal of Philosophy. 95(8):410-426. [Link] [DOI:10.2307/2564636]
  15. Priest G (2002). Inconsistency and the empirical sciences. In: Meheus J, editor. Inconsistency in science (Volume 2). Dordrecht: Springer. [Link] [DOI:10.1007/978-94-017-0085-6_7]
  16. Priest G, Routley R (1984). Introduction: Paraconsistent logics. Studia Logica. 43:3-16. [Link] [DOI:10.1007/BF00935736]
  17. Tarski A (1994). Introduction to logic and to the methodology of the deductive sciences. New York: Oxford University Press. [Link]
Philosophical Thought
Volume 2, Issue 3 - Serial Number 7
Autumn 2022
Pages 269-282