PhilSci Archive

'Two as Good as One Hundred'--Poorly Replicated Evidence is Some 19th Century Neuroscientific Research

Bogen, Jim (2000) 'Two as Good as One Hundred'--Poorly Replicated Evidence is Some 19th Century Neuroscientific Research. [Preprint]

This is the latest version of this item.

[img] RTF (.rtf)
Download (195Kb)

    Abstract

    According to a received doctrine, espoused, by Karl Popper and Harry Collins, and taken for granted by many others, poorly replicated evidence should be epistemically defective and incapable of persuading scientists to accept the views it is used to argue for. But John Hughlings Jackson used poorly replicated clinical and post-mortem evidence to mount rationally compelling and influential arguments for a highly progressive theory of the organization of the brain and its functions. This paper sets out a number of Jackson's arguments from his evidence and argues that they constitute a counter example against the received doctrine.

    Export/Citation:EndNote | BibTeX | Dublin Core | ASCII/Text Citation (Chicago) | HTML Citation | OpenURL
    Social Networking:
    Share |
    Item Type: Preprint
    Keywords: Keywords: Keywords: Hughlings Jackson, replication of evidence, 19th century neuroscience, Popper, HM Collins, epistemology of science.observation
    Subjects: General Issues > Confirmation/Induction
    General Issues > History of Science Case Studies
    Specific Sciences > Psychology/Psychiatry
    General Issues > Theory/Observation
    Depositing User: jim bogen
    Date Deposited: 26 Mar 2001
    Last Modified: 07 Oct 2010 11:10
    Item ID: 211
    URI: http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/id/eprint/211

    Available Versions of this Item

    Actions (login required)

    		 View Item

    Document Downloads