Lakatos One and Lakatos Two: An Appreciation

“…According to Lakatos, the identification of a research programme and its constituent theories requires an identification of its hard core. Yet in efforts to identify the hard cores of research programmes in the natural sciences, several philosophers of science have found that they are not as hard and identifiable as Lakatos believes (Berkson 1974(Berkson , 1976Laudan 1977;Musgrave 1976). Hard cores are not immutable and have been shown to evolve over time.…”

Section: Appraising the Progressiveness Of Bueno De Mesquita's Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While there are many criticisms of Lakatos' concept of research programmes, several philosophers of science nonetheless concur with Lakatos regarding the role played by the positive heuristic in a progressive research programme. Berkson (1974Berkson ( , 1976 for example, finds that a progressive research programme is marked by a positive heuristic that "guides the researcher to new ideas and problems" (1976,53). Musgrave, too, finds that progressive research programmes "throw up a rich store of interesting problems and hints about how to solve them, while a degenerating program does not" (1976,482).…”

Section: Appraisal Of the Expected Utility Theory Of Warmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Expected Utility Theory of Conflict: Measuring Theoretical Progress

Simowitz¹,

Price²

1990

Am Polit Sci Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We examine the “progressivity” of Bruce Bueno de Mesquita's theory of conflict as originally developed in The War Trap and as extended later. Bueno de Mesquita offers the progressivity of the expected utility theory relative to other theories and approaches to conflict as his major defense in responding to critics. Bueno de Mesquita essentially relies on Imre Lakatos' definition of theoretical progress in presenting his argument. A review of the literature addressing the concept of theoretical progress indicates that Bueno de Mesquita's application of Lakatosian criteria is incomplete and that Lakatos' criteria are themselves flawed. We review the philosophy of science literature dealing with theoretical progress or rational criteria for theory choice and evaluate the progressivity of the expected utility theory of conflict in light of criteria other than Lakatos'. While we do recommend further elaboration of Bueno de Mesquita's theory, we do not find it more progressive than its rivals.

show abstract

“…It remains a question for debate whether Lakatos himself altered his interpretation of his methodology (his meta-methodological criteria would allow, even encourage, rival versions of his methodology!) or whether he conflated theory-choice with theory-change as Berkson (1976) seems to argue.…”

Section: Alternative Research Programs 685mentioning

confidence: 99%