20  Theory specification methods ✎ Outline

20.1 Building a discrimination repertoire

  • Learning to make up tacts will help you spot it occurring elsewhere, give you a discrimination and tacting repertoire to point it out yourself
  • See: Chambers book, Neuroskeptic 9 circles of hell

20.2 Can you discriminate their hypothesis, RQ, and goals?

  • Description, prediction, influence — or a mushy none-of-the-above?

20.3 Bullshit

  • Identifying claims that are not even attempting to be truthful

20.4 Goals

  • Description, prediction, influence
  • Explananda vs explanantia, circular reasoning

20.5 Subjunctive vs. indicative theory

20.5.1 Would It Be Tight

  • Burden of proof: what evidence do the authors provide that their theory would not merely be tight?

20.5.2 In a world fallacy

  • Theories that only work under unstated ideal conditions

20.6 Logical arguments

  • Sound and valid arguments
  • Failure to consider alternative explanations
  • Affirmation of the consequent
  • Auxiliary hypotheses

20.7 Motte and Bailey arguments

  • Strategic retreat to defensible positions when stronger claims are challenged

20.8 (Strategic) ambiguity

  • General claims require generalised effects

20.9 Not even wrong claims

  • What is your estimand, counterfactuals

20.10 Lego science

  • Mechanistic assembly of findings without theoretical coherence

20.11 Ignorance systems

  • Research areas sustained by not asking certain questions