Imre Lakatos ( 11/9/1922- 2/2/1974) Imre Lakatos
was a philosopher of mathematics
. He was born Imre Lipschitz in Hungary
. He received a degree in mathematics, physics
, and philosophy
from the University of Debrecen
. He became an active communist
during the second world war
After the war, he worked in the Hungarian ministry of education. He was imprisoned (for political reasons?) from 1950
In 1956, during a time of upheaval in Hungary, Lakatos fled to Vienna
, and later reached England
. He received a doctorate in philosophy in 1961
from the University of Cambridge
. The book Proofs and Refutations
published after his death, is based on this work.
he was appointed to a position in the London School of Economics
, and remained there until his death. He wrote on philosophy of mathematics, and more generally on the philosophy of science
. The LSE philosophy of science department at that time included Karl Popper
and John Watkins
Parts of his correspondence with his friend Paul Feyerabend
have been published in For and Against Method
Lakatos’ contribution to the Philosophy of Science was to attempt a to resolve the perceived conflict betweenPopper’sfalsifiability
and the revolutionary structure of science described byKuhn
Kuhn had described science as consisting of periods of normal science interspersed with periods of great conceptual change, backing up his case with evidence from thehistory of science
. Popper had presented falsificationism as a way to overcome theproblem of induction
and also to distinguish scientific from non-scientific propositions. Popper’s prescription implies a smooth progress from one hypothesis to another as they are falsified and replaced with increasingly bold and powerful hypotheses. This is 'prima facie' at odds with the history of science as described by Kuhn, in which scientists defend their doctrines, even when the evidence against them becomes overwhelming.
The problem for Lakatos was to defend the presumed rationality of scientific method against the frivolity of the apparent behaviour of scientists. For Lakatos, science progressed by developing complex research programs that include testable hypotheses, and also an untestable ‘core’ of doctrine, which those involved in the research program would not permit to be falsified.
A research program consists of, in Lakatos’ terms, anegative heuristic or 'hard core' that is not open to negotiation, and in effect lays down the foundations of the program. One example given is Newton’s three laws of dynamics, which define quantities such as force. These are not open to falsificationwithin the Newtonian system, but are defended at all cost by thepositive heuristic, a 'protective belt' of statements that are open to falsification. When falsified, these are replaced by variations that are also falsifiable, but which continue to protect the hard core. Thus a research program provides a framework within which research can be undertaken with constant reference to presumed first principles which are shared by those involved in the research program, and without continually defending these first principles.
Lakatos claimed that research programs could be evaluated by comparing their ability to produce new facts, and by their ability to explain apparent refutations. In effect, a research program grows as its positive heuristic extends its applicability into new areas. A research program that is in a state of constantly defending its hard core, and which appears not to be extending itself into new areas, becomesdegenerate. Such research programs are in danger of being superseded by more vigorous competitors.