What is David Harriman's Logical Leap Book Review?

  • Thread starter Thread starter mmarotta
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

David Harriman's book, The Logical Leap: Induction in Physics, presents a novel methodology for scientific inquiry, arguing that induction integrates new experiences with prior knowledge to form generalizations. Harriman critiques the traditional hypothetico-deductive method, asserting it leads to skepticism due to its inability to provide objective validation of theories. He supports his thesis with historical examples from notable scientists such as Galileo, Newton, and Dalton. Despite some presentation flaws, the book is a significant contribution to the philosophy of science and is endorsed by Leonard Peikoff, a prominent Objectivist philosopher.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of induction in scientific methodology
  • Familiarity with the hypothetico-deductive method
  • Knowledge of historical scientific figures like Galileo, Newton, and Dalton
  • Basic principles of Objectivism and its philosophical implications
NEXT STEPS
  • Explore the principles of Objectivism and its impact on scientific thought
  • Study the hypothetico-deductive method in detail
  • Analyze historical case studies of scientific induction
  • Read critiques and discussions surrounding The Logical Leap for diverse perspectives
USEFUL FOR

This discussion is beneficial for philosophers, scientists, and students of science who are interested in alternative methodologies for scientific inquiry and the philosophical underpinnings of induction.

mmarotta
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Book Review: The Logical Leap: Induction in Physics by David Harriman, with an introduction by Leonard Peikoff. New American Library, July 2010. Paperback, 279 pages + vi, illustrations. $16.00.

Despite some flaws in the presentation, David Harriman’s proposal for a new method of scientific methodology is interesting, valuable, and important. Harriman’s thesis is that induction is actually the integration of a new experience with the totality of all previous experience for the purpose of creating a new generalization. One example is enough for a generalization, if it is validly composed. According to Harriman, to be valid, an induction must be derived from a first-level generalization. To demonstrate the truth of his claim, Harriman provides examples from the works of Galileo, Newton, and Dalton, among others.

Harriman has his own new theory of science, dismissing the accepted scientific method. “Today, it is almost universally held that the process of theory creation is nonobjective. According to the most common view, which is institutionalized in the so-called “hypothetico-deductive method,” it is only the testing of theories (i.e., comparing predictions to observations) that gives science any claim to objectivity. Unfortunately, say the advocates of this method, such testing cannot result in proof – and it cannot result even in disproof, since any theory can be saved from an inconvenient observation merely by adding more arbitrary hypotheses. So the hypothetico-deductive method leads invariably to skepticism” (pp. 145-146). Thus, to Harriman, Newton’s experiments did not validate Descartes’ (more correct) theory of light.

David Harriman earned a master's degree in physics from University of Maryland, and a master's in philosophy from Claremont Graduate University. Leonard Peikoff completed a doctorate in philosophy at NYU.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Like Harriman, Peikoff is a proponent of Objectivism, which offers an alternative to the traditional view of science. He provides an introduction to The Logical Leap, in which he endorses Harriman's new approach to induction. The Logical Leap is well-written and thought-provoking. While it does have some flaws, such as its tendency to overstate and oversimplify, overall it offers an important new approach for evaluating scientific theories. It is a valuable contribution to the literature on the philosophy of science, and a worthwhile read for anyone interested in the subject.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
5K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
10K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
7K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K