The Nature and Definition of Scientific Prediction

In science, a prediction can be understood in two ways: as the operation or activity used to formulate a description of a material fact, or as the description itself (the sentence).

At times, some philosophers and epistemologists refer to scientific prediction, perhaps influenced by Hempel-like reasoning or arguments made to obtain a predictive conclusion.

Prediction usually refers to a statement—a descriptive sentence about an event, often of a low level of generality. A characteristic of all scientific prediction is that we do not yet know the cognitive status of the utterance, or whether it is a hypothesis whose truth value is unknown.

It is a mistake to identify prediction solely with the description of a future event, since not all predictions concern the future. A scientific prediction is a conjecture formulated based on the knowledge we possess within a certain scientific discipline; thus, it is neither capricious nor merely a prophecy.

Scientific Prediction vs. Prophecy

What distinguishes a scientific prediction from a prophecy is that the prediction is a statement derived from existing knowledge. This definition makes no allusion to temporality.

For example, if it is assumed that all metals expand when heated (a law), and we take a metal rod and heat it (initial conditions), we can then predict: “This metal rod is delayed.”

Note that the fact may have already occurred (it is delayed in the past), but it is a true prediction—a passage from the known to the unknown—which must then be contrasted with observation or experiment. Therefore, what always happens after the test is the verification of the prediction, not necessarily the fact itself.

Retrodiction: Predictions About the Past

Naturally, many predictions concern the future, but others relate to the past and are called retrodictions. Retrodictions are a kind of scientific prediction.

Similarly, if I change my regular diet to calorie-rich foods, after a couple of days, if I feel heavy, I can make the prediction that I have gained weight.

Science, Philosophy, and Learning Theories

The Disinterested Pursuit of Science

Science, in fact, is by definition a disinterested pursuit, eager for truth, and as such is from the beginning “eclectic.”

Robert Gagné and Information Processing Theory

Speaking of eclectic learning theory, Robert Gagné incorporates elements from other psychological theories to develop a complex combination of elements from them, building an exciting new theoretical formulation known as “information processing.”

The Relationship Between Philosophy and Science

We can confidently state that philosophy and science should relate and recognize each other. They have functions that are different and sometimes antagonistic, but ultimately complementary.

Updating Learning Theories

Likewise, learning theories, even after they are established, should be updated as science progresses, and must not lose sight of the human being they seek to form.