Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
A different meaning of the term hypothesis is used in formal logic, to denote the antecedent of a proposition; thus in the proposition "If P, then Q", P denotes the hypothesis (or antecedent); Q can be called a consequent. P is the assumption in a (possibly counterfactual) What If question.
Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts." [4] The meaning of the term scientific theory (often contracted to theory for brevity) as used in the disciplines of science is significantly different from the common vernacular usage of theory.
The history of scientific method considers changes in the methodology of scientific inquiry, not the history of science itself. The development of rules for scientific reasoning has not been straightforward; scientific method has been the subject of intense and recurring debate throughout the history of science, and eminent natural philosophers and scientists have argued for the primacy of ...
Data Interpretation: This can be represented through tables, figures, and pictures, and then described in words. Test, revising of hypothesis; Conclusion, reiteration if necessary; A common misconception is that a hypothesis will be proven (see, rather, null hypothesis). Generally, a hypothesis is used to make predictions that can be tested by ...
Accepting a hypothesis does not mean that you believe in it, but only that you act as if it were true. 3 Use this procedure only if little is known about the problem at hand, and only to draw provisional conclusions in the context of an attempt to understand the experimental situation.
The English word theory derives from a technical term in philosophy in Ancient Greek.As an everyday word, theoria, θεωρία, meant "looking at, viewing, beholding", but in more technical contexts it came to refer to contemplative or speculative understandings of natural things, such as those of natural philosophers, as opposed to more practical ways of knowing things, like that of skilled ...
Consider the modal account in terms of the argument given as an example above: All frogs are green. Kermit is a frog. Therefore, Kermit is green. The conclusion is a logical consequence of the premises because we can not imagine a possible world where (a) all frogs are green; (b) Kermit is a frog; and (c) Kermit is not green.
In this example, the first premise is a conditional statement in which "P" is the antecedent and "Q" is the consequent. The second premise "affirms" the antecedent. The conclusion, that the consequent must be true, is deductively valid. A mixed hypothetical syllogism has four possible forms, two of which are valid, while the other two are invalid.