People still try to discredit positivism though. They say that positivists use subjunctive mathematics rather objective mathematics. Through these accusations, positivists take a mighty blow and become nearly wholly discredited. By saying that positivists are subjunctive, one is saying that positivists add to the disorder of the experiment by using theory over fact. If a positivist came to me with an experiment on how to get better tire traction on a race track I, being a skeptic, could discredit him by saying that his logic falls on the theoretical side and is therefore subjunctive. Now to argue against me, the positivist would go out to the ¼ mile strip and lessen the air pressure of his front tires, creating more tire to track surface area (assuming the car is FWD as well). He has now proved that his tires will catch the track faster on the next run by having more surface area. I though can do the same thing he has done, just with drag slicks as the addition to my car rather than a somewhat deflated tire with tread. I have now proved that he is assuming that there is one way to get on

Some common words found in the essay are:
, Naive Baconians, Pierre Duhem, quine-duhem theory, mathematical logic, theoretical terms, section 1 question, 1 question #2, scientific realism, outcome experiment, disorder experiment, theory positivist, crucial experiment, saying positivists, naive baconians,
Approximate Word count = 740
Approximate Pages = 3 (250 words per page double spaced)