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