Avanzar demasiado rápido: la elaboración de una hipótesis ad hoc


  • Sarah L. Scott Department of Philosophy, John Jay College of Criminal Justice.



Palabras clave:

teoría, modificación, evidencia, metodología


Una disputa científica puede girar crucialmente sobre si una hipótesis es ad hoc o no. Así, es extremadamente importante determinar qué hace ad hoc a una hipótesis. Sin embargo, los tratamientos previos han fracasado o bien debido a que se han visto entremezclados con el problema de Quine-Duhem o bien debido a otros defectos mayores.

Desarrollo un tratamiento novedoso de la ad hocidad. Propongo que una hipótesis es ad hoc cuando evidencia disconfirmatoria lleva a los científicos a aceptar esa hipótesis en su teoría, aun cuando el núcleo de la teoría, en combinación con las hipótesis auxiliares y la evidencia, no implican la hipótesis.


Ayer, A. J. (1946), Language, Truth and Logic, 2nd ed., New York: Dover Publications, Inc.

Bamford, G. (1993), “Popper’s Explications of Ad Hocness: Circularity, Empirical Content, and Scientific Practice”, The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 44(2): 335-355.

Boyle, R. (1662), A Defense of the Doctrine Touching the Spring and Weight of the Air, proposed by Mr. R. Boyle in his new physico-mechanical experiments, against the objections of Franciscus Linus; wherewith the objector’s funicular hypothesis is also examin’d, by the author of those experiments, edited by R. Sharrock, London: printed by F. G. for Thomas Robinson.

Debarbatt, S., Wytrzyszczak, I. M., Lieske, J. H. and R. Feldman (eds.) (1997), “Discoveries in the Solar System”, Dynamics and Astrometry of Natural and Artificial Celestial Bodies: proceedings of IAU Colloquium 165, New York: Springer, pp. 133-140.

Duhem, P. (1962), The Aim and Structure of Physical Theory, New York: Atheneum.

Einstein, A. (1998), “On a Heuristic Point of View Concerning the Production and Trans-formation of Light”, in Stachel, J. (ed.), Einstein’s Miraculous Year: Five Papers That Changed the Face of Physics, Princeton: Princeton University Press.

Gould, S. J. (1977), Ever Since Darwin: Reflections on Natural History, New York: W.W. Norton and Co.

Greene, R. A. (1962), “Henry More and Robert Boyle on the Spirit of Nature”, Journal of the History of Ideas 23(4): 451-474.

Grigg, R. (2002), “Pre-Adamic man: were there human beings on Earth before Adam?”, Creation 24(4): 42-45.

Hempel, C. (1966), Philosophy of Natural Science, Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice–Hall, Inc.

Hoefer, C. (2007), “The Third Way on Objective Probability: A Skeptic’s Guide to Objective Chance”, Mind 116: 549-596.

Hurley, P. M. (1970), “The Confirmation of Continental Drift”, Continents Adrift: Readings from Scientific American, San Francisco: W. H. Freeman and Co., pp. 57-67.

Kuhn, T. S. (1978), Blackbody Theory and the Quantum Discontinuity 1894-1912,Chicago: Chicago University Press.

Kuhn, T. S. (1962), The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Lakatos, I. (1970), “Falsificationism and the Methodology of Scientific Research Pro-grammes”, in Lakatos, I. and A. Musgrave (eds.), Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 91-195.

Leplin, J. (1982), “The Assessment of Auxiliary Hypotheses”, The British Journal for the Phi-losophy of Science 33: 235-249.

Leplin, J. (1975), “The Concept of an Ad Hoc Hypothesis”, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 5(4): 308-245.

Newton, I. (1999), The Principia: Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy, I. B. Cohen and A. Whitman (trans.), Berkeley: University of California Press.

Pascal, B. (1937), The Physical Treatises of Pascal: the equilibrium of liquids and the weight of the mass of the air, New York: Columbia University Press.

Planck, M. (1967), “On the Theory of the Energy Distribution Law of the Normal Spec-trum”, in ter Harr, D. (ed.), Annalen der Physik, Oxford: Pergamon Press, pp. 553-563.

Popper, K. (1983), Realism and the Aim of Science: From the Postscript to the Logic of Scientific Discovery, New York: Routledge Press.

Reichenbach, H. (1938), Experience and Prediction, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Ross, H. (1998), The Genesis Question, Colorado: Nav Press.See, T. J. J. (1910), “Leverrier’s Letter to Galle and the Discovery of Neptune”, Popular As-tronomy 18: 475-476.

Stanley, S. M. (1989), Earth and Life Through Time, 2nd ed., New York: W. H. Freeman and Co.

Strevens, M. (2001), “The Bayesian Treatment of Auxiliary Hypotheses”, The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 52: 515-537.

Wegener, A. (1966), The Origin of Continents and Oceans, J. Biram (trans.), 4th edition, New York: Dover Publications.

Wilson, J. T. (1970), “Continental Drift”, Continents Adrift: Readings from Scientific American, San Francisco: W. H. Freeman and Co., pp. 40-55.Wright, C. (1993), Realism, Meaning, and Truth, Oxford: Blackwell.




Cómo citar

Scott, S. L. (2011). Avanzar demasiado rápido: la elaboración de una hipótesis ad hoc. Metatheoria – Revista De Filosofía E Historia De La Ciencia, 2(1), 37–60. https://doi.org/10.48160/18532330me2.62