Empirical evidence is a source of knowledge
acquired by means of observation or experimentation.
The term comes from the Greek word for experience,
Εμπειρία.
Empirical evidence is information that justifies
a belief in the truth or falsity of a claim.
In the empiricist view, one can claim to have
knowledge only when one has a true belief
based on empirical evidence. This stands in
contrast to the rationalist view under which
reason or reflection alone is considered to
be evidence for the truth or falsity of some
propositions. The senses are the primary source
of empirical evidence. Although other sources
of evidence, such as memory, and the testimony
of others ultimately trace back to some sensory
experience, they are considered to be secondary,
or indirect.
In another sense, empirical evidence may be
synonymous with the outcome of an experiment.
In this sense, an empirical result is a unified
confirmation. In this context, the term semi-empirical
is used for qualifying theoretical methods
which use in part basic axioms or postulated
scientific laws and experimental results.
Such methods are opposed to theoretical ab
initio methods which are purely deductive
and based on first principles.
In science, empirical evidence is required
for a hypothesis to gain acceptance in the
scientific community. Normally, this validation
is achieved by the scientific method of hypothesis
commitment, experimental design, peer review,
adversarial review, reproduction of results,
conference presentation and journal publication.
This requires rigorous communication of hypothesis,
experimental constraints and controls, and
a common understanding of measurement.
Statements and arguments depending on empirical
evidence are often referred to as a posteriori
as distinguished from a priori.. A priori
knowledge or justification is independent
of experience; whereas a posteriori knowledge
or justification is dependent on experience
or empirical evidence. The notion of the distinction
between A priori and a posteriori as tantamount
to the distinction between empirical and non-empirical
knowledge comes from Kant's Critique of Pure
Reason.
The standard positivist view of empirically
acquired information has been that observation,
experience, and experiment serve as neutral
arbiters between competing theories. However,
since the 1960s, a persistent critique most
associated with Thomas Kuhn, has argued that
these methods are influenced by prior beliefs
and experiences. Consequently it cannot be
expected that two scientists when observing,
experiencing, or experimenting on the same
event will make the same theory-neutral observations.
The role of observation as a theory-neutral
arbiter may not be possible. Theory-dependence
of observation means that, even if there were
agreed methods of inference and interpretation,
scientists may still disagree on the nature
of empirical data.
See also
Empirical distribution function
Empirical formula
Empirical measure
Empirical research
Phenomenology
Scientific evidence
Scientific method
Theory
Footnotes
References
Bird, Alexander. 4.2 Perception, Observational
Incommensurability, and World-Change. In Zalta,
Edward N. "Thomas Kuhn". Stanford Encyclopedia
of Philosophy. Retrieved 25 January 2012. 
Craig, Edward. "a posteriori". The Shorter
Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Routledge.
ISBN 9780415324953. 
Feldman, Richard [1999]. "Evidence". In Audi,
Robert. The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy.
Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
pp. 293–294. ISBN 978-0521637220. 
Kuhn, Thomas S. [1962]. The Structure of Scientific
Revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago
Press. ISBN 978-0226458045. 
Pickett, Joseph P., ed.. "Empirical". The
American Heritage Dictionary of the English
Language. Houghton Mifflin. ISBN 978-0-547-04101-8. 
External links
The dictionary definition of empirical evidence
at Wiktionary
A Priori and A Posteriori entry in the Internet
Encyclopedia of Philosophy
