RT info:eu-repo/semantics/article
T1 Empirical Underdetermination: The Empirical Side of the Duhem‐Quine Thesis
A1 Caamaño Alegre, Maria
AB Theoretical underdetermination is a central issue in the Philosophy of Science, having beendiscussed and debated since the early 20th century. The so-called "Duhem-Quine problem"has been used as an umbrella term to refer to a number of problematic features that arise fromthe lack of a biunivocal correspondence between theory and evidence. However, the nowfamiliar idea that the detection of an empirical phenomenon is inferred from a complexcollection of data (Bogen & Woodward 1988, Woodward 1989, 2000, 2010, McAllister 1997,2011, Glymour 2000, Harris 2003, Massimi 2007, Leonelli 2015, 2019, Bokulich 2020)entails the recognition that not only theories, but also the description of empirical phenomenaare underdetermined by evidence. Empirical underdetermination, understood as theunderdetermination of evidence (or assumed empirical phenomena) by data, emerges as amajor challenge that has yet to be fully recognized and carefully addressed in the philosophyof science. The paper summarizes the distinction between empirical and theoreticalunderdetermination as it implicitly appears in the literature to date. It presents them asinstances of a more general type, both of which arise from the same basic problems, albeit atdifferent levels and with different implications. Important but often overlooked aspects of theempirical/theoretical distinction, the notion of background assumption, and the different rolesof evidence will be clarified.
SN 1747-9991
YR 2025
FD 2025
LK https://uvadoc.uva.es/handle/10324/82629
UL https://uvadoc.uva.es/handle/10324/82629
LA spa
NO Caamaño Alegre, María (2025) “Empirical Underdetermination: The Empirical Side of the Duhem‐Quine Thesis”. Philosophy Compass 20 (3), 2025: e70022. DOI: 10.1111/phc3.70022
DS UVaDOC
RD 07-feb-2026