Lakatos ' View Of Demarcation

1249 Words5 Pages
Lakatos’ view is founded on the premise that demarcation can be settled by looking at the theory and deciding whether or not it has the ability to predict a future event. Lakatos begins his paper by arguing that certain propositions that came before him do not truly address the issue of demarcation and rather they tend to cause problems when viewing the issue as a whole. Lakatos notes a glaring flaw with prevailing ideas as it does not address the fact that most scientists would disregard such falsities as anomalies or create an auxiliary to serve as an addendum to their theory. Lakatos claims that for a theory to be considered a science, that it must have the ability to forecast occurrences. That is to say that these theories must have the ability to predict something to happen. The application of Lakatos’ view is clearly explained by a few examples that he notes namely the reoccurrence of Halley’s Comet. Lakatos notes, “Halley, working in Newton’s programme, calculated on the basis of observing a brief stretch of a comet’s path that it would return in seventy-two years’ time; he calculated to the minute when it would be seen again at a well-defined point of the sky. This was incredible. But seventy-two years later, [when both Newton and Halley were long dead,] Halley’s Comet returned exactly as Halley predicted” (Lakatos transcript) exemplifying his idea regarding the necessity of a theory to predict a future event. However, it must be noted that the future event does not
Get Access