테스트 가능성
Testability |
실험 가설에 적용되는 특성인 검정성에는 다음 두 가지 성분이 포함됩니다.
즉, 가설은 누군가의 실험을 바탕으로 그것이 참인지 거짓인지를 판단할 수 있는 가능성이 있는 경우 검정할 수 있다.이를 통해 이론이 데이터에 의해 뒷받침되거나 반박될 수 있는지 여부를 결정할 수 있습니다.그러나 실험 데이터의 해석은 결정적이지 않거나 불확실할 수도 있다.
「 」를 참조해 주세요.
추가 정보
- Johansson, Lars-Goran (2015). "Hypotheses and hypothesis testing". Philosophy of science for scientists. Cham: Springer-Verlag. pp. 41–61 (59). doi:10.1007/978-3-319-26551-3. ISBN 9783319265490. OCLC 923649072.
... the question of whether the auxiliary assumption is testable or not is not so easy to determine as it might first appear. Criteria regarding independent testability do not seem to be absolute. ... The least common denominator for all sciences is that hypotheses are formulated and tested. This is meaningful only if one is prepared to change one's mind after testing, to admit that even one's favourite hypothesis was wrong. ... The result of the test is either that the predictions and observation reports are compatible, or that they conflict. In the former case one may be justified to say that one's hypothesis is supported. In the latter case one must reconsider something; one must reject either the hypothesis, some auxiliary assumption, or the observation report.
- Kegan, 로버트, Lahey, 리사 Laskow(2009년)."당신의 큰 가정의 시험 디자인하는 것".면책 방법과 잠재력 자신과 조직의 해제를 극복할 변경합니다.은 공공의 이익을 위해 지도력.보스턴:하버드 비지니스 출판부.를 대신하여 서명함. 256–264.아이 에스비엔 9781422117361.OCLC 231580325.당신들 각 시험의 목적은 때 의도적으로 다음 큰 가정에 대한 결과의 의미를 돌아보게 당신의 평소 행동을 바꾸무슨 일이 생기는지 보는 것이다...[가설]검증 가능한 하려면 발굴한 시퀀스의 사전 가설이 백업할 수 있을지도 모른다...일단 큰 가정을 시험하기로 결정했습니다, 다음 단계가 그것에 도전할 당신의 첫번째 실험을 설계하는 것이다.로버트 Kegan와 리사는 Lahey 어떻게 일상 생활에서 노골적인 검증 가능한 가설들에 개인적 암묵적 가정하는 것을 제안한다.
- Keuth, Herbert (2004) [Published in German 2000]. "From falsifiability to testability". The philosophy of Karl Popper (1st English ed.). Cambridge, UK; New York: Cambridge University Press. pp. 48–49. ISBN 9780521548304. OCLC 54503549.
Consequently, the universal statements, which are contradicted by the basic statements, are not strictly refutable. Like singular statements and probability statements, they are empirically testable, but their tests do not have certain, definite results, do not result in strict verification or falsification but only in temporary acceptance or rejection.
- Popper, Karl (2002) [Published in German 1935; English translation 1959]. The logic of scientific discovery (Reprint ed.). London; New York: Routledge. pp. 95–120 (95). doi:10.4324/9780203994627. ISBN 9780415278447. OCLC 48533950.
Theories may be more, or less, severely testable; that is to say, more, or less, easily falsifiable. The degree of their testability is of significance for the selection of theories. In this chapter, I shall compare the various degrees of testability or falsifiability of theories through comparing the classes of their potential falsifiers. This investigation is quite independent of the question whether or not it is possible to distinguish in an absolute sense between falsifiable and non-falsifiable theories. Indeed one might say of the present chapter that it 'relativizes' the requirement of falsifiability by showing falsifiability to be a matter of degree.
- Sober, Elliott (November 1999). "Testability". Proceedings and Addresses of the American Philosophical Association. 73 (2): 47–76 (47–48). doi:10.2307/3131087. JSTOR 3131087.
The idea that some experiments really do test a proposition, while others do not, is not controversial, nor does it deserve to be. ... Testing is to testability as dissolving is to solubility. If we can understand what testing is, we also should be able to understand what testability is.
