The common method of concordance and difference can be presented symbolically: one of the main characteristics of scientific methodology is verification and falsification. Remember J. 4 that an appeal is made to Dieun if we conclude for lack of evidence that something is the case or not. While there are times when a lack of evidence should lead to a judgment that the original claim is not substantiated (as in a criminal court), this is not the case in scientific practices. Under the tailings method, if we have a number of factors that are assumed to be the causes of a number of effects, and we have reason to believe that all factors, with the exception of a factor C, are causes of all effects, with the exception of one, we should infer that C is the cause of the residual effect. In this case, you are the only one who is not sick. The only difference between you and the others is that you didn`t make a salad. It`s probably the cause of other people`s illnesses. It is an application of the method of difference. This rule says that if you have a situation that leads to an effect, and another that does not, and the only difference is the presence of only one factor in the first situation, we can infer that factor as the cause of the effect. Thus, we might find that you felt a little sick after eating an oyster, while your sister was rather comfortable eating a few, and your father became seriously ill after eating ten in a row.
Since the variation in the number of oysters corresponds to a variation in the severity of the disease, it would be reasonable to infer that the diseases were caused by oysters. So far, I have talked a lot about observations and how we can improve them, but we often observe to learn more about causal relationships, what depends on what? I will conclude our discussion of observations by introducing a framework that we can use to understand how scientists draw conclusions based on their observations, experiences and simulations. The logic of observation is based on conclusions was described by John Stuart Mill, a philosopher best known for writing about freedom, but who also has many contributions on how we think about science. Mill was interested in how we can use observations and experiences to determine the causes or what depends on them. He introduced a series of methods to reflect on the empirical data that we now call Mills` methods. I will talk about the first two of his methods; what we now call the method of agreement and the method of disagreement. So, to think about these methods, let`s make a distinction between the results and the conditions. Let`s say there was an outbreak of food poisoning at a local restaurant. The fact that people have fallen ill is the result. The various foods that people were doing, the different restaurants where they were, and people`s health stories are the conditions. Scientists have often cited the results of dependent variables and the different conditions of independent variables.
I use those terms.