No abstract

Seventy-two scientists (psychologists, biologists, and physicists) from a large US midwestern state university completed a questionnaire designed to assess understanding of the principles of formal logic believed by philosophers of science to be essential to theory and hypothesis testing. The questionnaire, in a multiple-choice format, required solutions to problems presented in either abstract (symbolic) or concrete (specific example) terms. Across academic disciplines the participants' performance reflected substantial deficits in the appreciation of straightforward logical propositions. For example, nearly half of the scientists failed to recognize the logical validity of modus tollens, an inferential rule of propositional logic which, from a strictly normative standpoint, has been depicted as the only form of valid conclusive inference in theory and hypothesis testing. The pivotal role of formal logic in philosophical analyses of scientific inference is questioned on empirical grounds.

No abstract

No abstract

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.. Association for Symbolic Logic is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Journal of Symbolic Logic.