rational empirical

Contrast "proof" vs. "evidence." Which is preferred, what keeps us from obtaining it, and what
do we do instead? What do we do to convince ourselves that our new knowledge is correct?
1. Proof is preferred to evidence, because having proof of something signifies that you know it will happen in every
case, and that simply from understanding something you know that it has to be true (a priori). Proof can only be
obtained from rational induction, whereas evidence is obtained by scientific empirical research. The problem with
obtaining proof is that either we lack the terminology to state something in an a priori fashion, and thus cannot
have true proof of it, and that scientifically it is almost impossible to prove something beyond any doubt in all
circumstances. Instead of having proof, we conduct (true) experiments that gives us what seems to be accurate
empirical research that provides us with evidence of what we want to prove. To convince ourselves that we have
it right, we replicate the study in a number of different ways that show the hypothesis is still correct in similar, and
vastly different situations until it is accepted by the scientific community as true knowledge.
2. Proof provides a study with certainty, and evidence is probabilistic. Proof is prefered in a study, but is too hard to
obtain. Proof is only found through rational induction which requires an axiom, or starting point. It is hard to have
an axiom when studying behavior, so we have to settle for evidence. Evidence is found through emperical
research, which is done by following the research process to come up with statistics and draw conclusions from
these statistics to convice ourselves that this knowledge is correct.
3. Proof is certantly and evidence is probablistic and comes from scientific empiricism. Proof is preffered but is very
hard to obtain if not impossible. The problem with obtaining proof is that we need an bottom line axiom and in
psychology with do not have a behavior axioms. Instead knowledge is gained by scientific empiricism. A person
comes up with experiment and a RH and then tests in and comes up with results and data. So to convince our
selves we take this experiment and replicate lots and lots of times so that we think that the answer we found is
true and then try to generalize it across other populations.
4. Proof is certainty, while evidence is only probablistic conlusiveness. There are no guarantees where evidence is
involved, therefore proof is preferred. Unfortunately, proof may only be derrived from rational inductive sources of
knowledge which are based on existing axioms (or completely accepted truths). Based on existing truths, rational
inductive reasoning results in proof.
In human behavior, however, there are no completely accepted axioms; nor can we obtain a complete population
sample and find a worldwide truth. Therefore, we must rely on using evidence aquired through scientific
empericism. To do this we use random, purposive samples that represent our target population and conduct
studies. In order to convince ourselves that this knowledge is correct we run replication studies (exact repeats of
previously conducted studies) to reinforce our findings. We also run convergent studies allowing us to build on
previous knowledge to bettere understand the true relationships between variables. In these ways we convince
ourselves that our evidence is correct through obtaining high probabilities or accuracy.
5. Proof only comes from rational induction or empirical reasearch and converging operations. Proof is preferred, but
rarely achieved due to different measurments, confounds and positive statistical conclusion. To convince
ourselves our new knowledge is correct, or that there is "proof" that it's correct, several experiments are
conducted in different conditions to make sure we get the same results without confounds several times. This is
statistical conclusion.
Evidence is when there are studies conducted that are said to lead to a conclusion, but have not been tested
enough to be a sure thing. There could be counfounds or different ways of measurement to yet be tested to get to
a comfortable point called proof.
6. Proof is only found in Rational Induction. To have this, however, you must have a starting axium of behavior, and
there is no starting axium with behavior. We therefore cannot prove that behavior is caused by anything. We in
turn use scientific empiracism which gives us evidence of behavioral comparisons. We cannot and should not use
one critical experiment as evidence, however. We should repeat our experiment using the same proceedures and
methods, and we should also use converging operations which uses similar proceedures and methods to
convince ourselves that what we have come up with is right.
7. Proof is certantly and evidence is probablistic and comes from scientific empiricism. Proof is preffered but is very
hard to obtain if not impossible. The problem with obtaining proof is that we need an bottom line axiom and in
psychology with do not have a behavior axioms. Instead knowledge is gained by scientific empiricism. A person
comes up with experiment and a RH and then tests in and comes up with results and data. So to convince our
selves we take this experiment and replicate lots and lots of times so that we think that the answer we found is
true and then try to generalize it across other populations.
8. Proof is not probabilistic whereas evidence is probabilistic. Proof is preferred, but issues like reliable statistical
relations, random assignment of participants keep us from obtaining it.
To convince ourselves that new knowledge is correct, we perform converging operations to manipulate different
inputs and procedures and see if we can still get the same results.
9. Proof is certainty. Evidence is only probabilistic. Scientific empiricism is probablistic, as our sampling frame is
based on only a part of the entire population and statistics, by their very nature, are all based on probabilities.
Proof is preferred, but in order to have proof we need to base our knowledge on rational inductive methods
starting with an axiom, or truth. There are no behavioral axioms. Instead, we use scientific empiricism and test our
initial hypothesis. After this, we replicate our study and perform converging studies to test the validity of our
10. Proof is something that comes from rational induction. Evidence comes from empirical research. Proof cannot be
used in a true experiment, you have to have evidence from empirical research. Evidence is definitely preferred,
because that is the only way to get a true experiment. It is harder to obtain because it has to be done through
research, whereas proof can be found just through rational induction and is way easier to come about.
11. Proof is based upon a previous "axiom" that is undenyably true. Evidence is based upon emperical research.
We prefer evidence, ethics and limitations like funding and inability to test certain subjects keep us from obtaining
it. And we try to conduct experiments/studies that are the closest possible replication of what we are trying to
study. We convince ourselves that our new knowledge is correct by replicating the study and convergence of that
knowledge as well.
12. Proof is something that does not exist when it comes to the workings of the mind. To have proof you must have
axioms, or constant truths that apply to all cases. This can never happen as no two people are the same.
Evidence, however, is something that researchers look for. There can be evidence to support theories about why
something is done. These theories are then what is tested based on this evidence.
13. Proof is an absolute statement of what is by rational induction. Evidence is a statement of empirical research
pointing to the liklihood of something being the effect. Evidence is the preffered choice of knowledge for
psychologists. A few things that keep us from obtaining evidence are attrition, technology, ethics. Other things
that can keep us from obtaining it is the amount of confounds in an experiment and whether we want our
experiment to be very controlled and be reliable or be not so controlled and be generalizable to the population. To
get around all of these potential problems we apply the research loop to these problems where we test and retest
hypotheses (convergent testing) to find out if they are valid or not. This convergent testing allows us to convince
ourselves that our new knowledge is correct or not correct.
14. Proof is considered certainty whereas evidence is considered probabilistic. Scientific empericism only allows for
evidence, because it uses a sampling and not the entire population. Statistical conclusions only equate to
probabilistic findings.
Only the rational inductive process leads to proof or certainty. In the rational iductive process you must begin at
an axium, sincer there are no behavioral axiums it is not possible to use them through rational inductive
processing to reach certainty.
The majority of what we know is based on associative information which we arrive at through scientific emperical
15. Proof is fact and evidence is probablist. We would prefer proof but it is impossible to achieve through
experimental methods. For this reason we employ the research loop. Through replication of experiments and
converging studies we can reach a high level of confidence in our evidence.
16. Evidence and proof differ in the reliability of the information that is gathered. Proof is the preferred of the two. It
begines with a starting axiom that is factual. This starting axiom leads to rational induction. New Knowledge is the
result of this process. Evidence is not gathered from a starting axiom like proof. Thats because there are no
factual axioms in behavior to start from. So information must be gathered through empiricle research. The
empiricle research results in information known as probolilistic conclusions. These are not strong enough to stand
alone like proof is so it is required for convergent studies to be done to add to the validity of the original research.
Also the new knowledge is considered correct if it was based on a proven experimental design. If this design has
worked for many years then it is ok.Between the converging research, replication studies, and a trust worthy
research design, this is all that can be done to increase the reliability of these findings.One can also try to
eliminate any confounds that exist. This helps as well.
17. Proof comes from rational induction, while evidence comes from scientific empericism. We are sure of proof and
have faith in evidence. We prefer proof, but this is difficult since rational induction relies on axioms to build on.
There are no behavioral axioms, so this is not always possible. Instead, we perform true experiments where there
is random assignment of individuals and the researcher manipulates the IV. We do this over and over again
(exactly), testing it, to convince ourselves that our new knowledge is correct.
18. Proof is certainty, while evidence is probable. Of course we would prefer to have proof. However, proof is based
on scientific empiricism, which is hard to obtain because much research lacks a starting point which enables us to
study it from a the beginning. Instead of having proof we produce studies, replicate them as closely as possible,
and run converging studies to test our hypotheses which produces good evidence or probabilistic conclusions of
the outcome.
19. Proof comes only from rational induction. Rational induction relies upon axioms or universal statements. Since
behavior follows no universally true rules, sciences that study behavior cannot prove anything. Proof would be
nice though. However, if a researcher performs a good experiment, it can suggest evidence about a given
subject. A good experiment requires several things. First, one must have a good random sample that is
representative of the population to which one wants to generalize the results of the experiment. Second, the
experiment must be a true experiment with manipulation of the independent variable by the researcher. Third,
there must be random assignment of individuals by the researcher before manipulation of the iv.To ensure that
the new knowledge is correct, different researchers perform the exact same experiment and try to replicate the
findings of the first study. Also, convergent studies with similar but slightly different experiments determine how
the results apply to other, similar circumstances.