The contemporary debate over scientific progress is fragmented into four competing, independent approaches, making systematic comparison difficult. To resolve this, we propose a formal meta-theory of progress, within which the different approaches can be represented and compared. Generalizing the formal core of truthlikeness theory, we develop a neutral meta-theory of “target-likeness.” We demonstrate how to represent the competing approaches as alternative measures of target-likeness. We conclude by discussing the implications and applications of our theory both inside and outside the current debate on scientific progress.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cevolani et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: