# 预测与顺应

> 【EN】In early philosophical literature, a ‘prediction’ was considered to be an empirical consequence of a theory that had not yet been verified at the time the theory was constructed—an ‘accommodation’ was one that had. The view that predictions are superior to accommodations in the assessment of scientific theories is known as ‘predictivism’. Commonly, however, predictivism is understood more precisely as entailing that evidence confirms theory more strongly when predicted than when accommodated. Much ink has been spilled modifying the concept of ‘prediction’ and explaining why predictivism is or is not true, and whether the history of science and, more recently, logic (Martin and Hjortland 2021) reveals that scientists are predictivist in their assessment of theories. The debate over predictivism also figures importantly in the debate about scientific realism. 【中】词条梳理预测与顺应的区分及其历史，考察特设性假说、新颖性的早期刻画与预测主义的类型学。核心争议是：同样的证据，仅仅因为在理论提出之前或之后被发现，确认力就该不同吗？文中讨论零支持论题、捏造解释、任意与非任意的合取，以及从严检验等论证。

- ID: m13280
- 分类: culture
- 领域: 哲学

## 定义

预测主义主张：在评估科学理论时，被预测的证据比被事后顺应的证据更能确认理论。早期文献把预测定义为理论建构时尚未验证的经验后果，把顺应定义为建构时已被知晓的经验后果。 脚手架作用：- 理论评估：优先采信先预测后验证的理论，警惕为迁就数据事后调参。 - 证据分级：按提出时该数据是否已知，给同一条证据以不同的确认力。

## 机制

支持者认为，事后拟合允许研究者调整理论去迁就数据，理论因而带有捏造的痕迹，其成功不能说明理论为真；先有预测则排除了这种调参空间。在贝叶斯框架下，差别来自似然度：若理论为假，它恰好命中已知数据的概率远高于命中未知数据的概率。

## 练习

1) 区分某项证据是在理论提出前还是提出后获得的；2) 检查理论是否为了容纳该证据而做过特设调整；3) 评估这种调整能否被独立检验；4) 在贝叶斯框架下比较两种情形的似然度差异。

## 脚手架用法

- 理论评估：优先采信先预测后验证的理论，警惕为迁就数据事后调参。 - 证据分级：按提出时该数据是否已知，给同一条证据以不同的确认力。

[阅读网页](https://thinkingmodels.site/entries/detail/m13280)