Topic B: Sophisticated inductivism
Question 1
The broad inductivist account of the scientific method is a sophisticated version of the naive inductivist method it was developed from it. But unlike the naive inductivism, the broad inductivist claim that scientific observation is not theory free it is problem and hypothesis driven. It rejects that induction is used to formulate theories, it claims that there is no method for the creation of theory, induction is used in science to test theories not create them. This means it is not possible to conclude from the observations that something is true you have to test you hypothesis. For example if you see a hamster and observe that it is white, then see another one which is white too, and then the third one is white too. So, you conclude that all hamsters are white, this is false not all hamsters are white.

The sophisticated inductivist's account of scientific the method is:
Problem > Hypothesis > imperical tests (lecture 9, slide 5)
This means one starts with a problem which is an unexplained observation that is not understood. After observing the problem a hypothesis must be formulated to show how and why the observation occured. Observable concequences of the hypothesis must be derived in order to test it, then test to check whether the hypothesis is true, and if true model the theory. Sophisticated inductivism fulfils the intuition of science of how scientific research is conducted.

Question 2
Objection 2: "Positive confirmation does not increase probability" (lecture 9, slide 14). This objection to the sophisticated inductivism has the supporting argument: "The Raven