It takes a theory to beat a theory.
This is famous and important dictum, but I do not know the origin. I searched in Google and found that Richard A. Epstein (1983, p.1435) had used this expression in 1983 and this was verified.
I wonder if some philosopher of science had expressed the similar idea. I found that Brousseau and Glachant (2001) hinted that the maxim appears in Thomas Kuhn's The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, but I could not find the maxim nor similar expressions.
If someone knows an earlier usage, please let me know. Thanks.
References:
Richard A. Epstein (1983) Common Law, Labor Law, and Reality: A Rejoinder to Professors Getman and Kohler. Yale Law Journal 92:1435-1441.
Eric Brousseau and Jean-Michel Glachant (eds.) (2002) The Economics of Contracts: Theories and Applications, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
I think in the Theaetetus Plato’s dialogues and maieutic, The Socratic method, comes the idea that “It takes a theory to beat a theory”.
1) The Theaetetus (Greek: Θεαίτητος) is one of Plato's dialogues concerning the nature of knowledge, written circa 369 BC.
In this dialogue, Socrates and Theaetetus discuss three definitions of knowledge: knowledge as nothing but perception, knowledge as true judgment, and, finally, knowledge as a true judgment with an account. Each of these definitions is shown to be unsatisfactory.
Socrates declares Theaetetus will have benefited from discovering what he does not know, and that he may be better able to approach the topic in the future. The conversation ends with Socrates' announcement that he has to go to court to face a criminal indictment.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theaetetus_(dialogue)
After distinguishing between knowledge and true judgement, Theaetetus recalls being told that true judgement 'with an account (logos) equates to knowledge (201d). Things without an account are 'unknowable', while things with an account are 'knowable'.
I think in the Theaetetus Plato’s dialogues comes the first idea that a theory (logos with a judgement) is necessary to overcome another theory.
2) Similarly, The Socratic method, also known as maieutic: the Socratic method is a method of hypothesis elimination, in that better hypotheses are found by steadily identifying and eliminating those that lead to contradictions.
Vassilis Doucas,
thank you for the information. It is really astonishing that idea "It takes theory to beat a theory" may go up to Plato.
I am also searching the origin of the expression. How about Norwood Russel Hanson?
@Yoshinori, In fact it is astonished that we still debate on Plato's ideas and one language, logos, maieutic, theory, dialogues....Without logos no theory and no theory no sciences..
As far as economics is concerned, I found a line written by Mark Blaug in his famous "Economic theory in retrospect", 5th Edition, Cambridge University Press (1997), p. 703
"The moral of this simple story is this: it takes a new theory, and not just the destructive exposure of assumptions or the collection of new facts, to beat an old theory."
We should remember, however, that the first edition of the book was published in 1962. !!!
Best regards ;-)
Dear Jacek Bednarz,
If this appears in the first edition of Blaug's book,it is really great. As I am retired and have no means to check if this part really appears in the first edition. Thank you very much.
I found another citation. The maxim appears in George Stigler's 1982 Nobel Prize Lecture:
- Nevertheless the economic theory of regulation is achieving a substantial scientific prosperity. Its findings with respect to both the operation and the origins of regulatory policies directed to particular industries (such as the securities markets, transportation, and occupational licensing) command a substantial support. To be sure, the explanatory triumphs have not been overwhelming, and indeed the theory itself is still relatively primitive. The main reason for the considerable acceptance of the approach is that fundamental rule of scientific combat: it takes a theory to beat a theory. No amount of scepticism about the fertility of a theory can deter its use unless the sceptic can point to another route by which the scientific problem of regulation can be studied successfully. (p.11 among 20 pages, my emphasis)
http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economic-sciences/laureates/1982/stigler-lecture.pdf
This citation also appeared in
- Legal Theory Blog OCTOBER 21, 2012
Legal Theory Lexicon: It Takes a Theory to Beat a Theory
I have been missing this. Thanks to Dave Taylor I had a chance to read this post again and I found this. Of course, 1982 is far later than 1962.
.http://lsolum.typepad.com/legaltheory/2012/10/introduction-it-takes-a-theory-to-beat-a-theory-this-is-surely-one-of-the-top-ten-all-time-comments-uttered-by-law-professo.html
Dear Vassilis Doucas,
Greeks are indeed extraordinary people. They have discovered logic and mathematics.
In China, Korea, and Japan, (and perhaps in any other places on earth) we had geometry and arithmetic but they were not a science which requires proofs. It is sometimes told (I do not know if this is really true) that, when Euclid's Elements was once introduced into China, Chinese estimated it useless because he argues what is obvious and true. They could not understand why propositions need proofs.
Dear Yoshinori, I appreciated your question and this is why I tried to provide an answer. A knowledge as nothing but perception mixed with a Nobel Prize, does not create a scentific statement or progress. George Stigler's "No amount of scepticism about the fertility of a theory can deter its use unless the sceptic can point to another route by which the scientific problem of regulation can be studied successfully." is not a discovery.
I could say that Statements without an account (LOGOS) are 'unknowable', while statements with an account are 'knowable'. Regards, Vassilis
- Badges
- Science method
- Similar topics
- Methodology