| Line 1: |
Line 1: |
| − | '''Smoking gun''' is an evidentiary trace (or subcollection of traces) that unambiguously descriminates one [[hypothesis]] from among a set of currently available rival hypotheses as providing "[[Inference to the Best Explanation|the best explanation]]" of the traces thus far observed.<ref name="Cleland">{{Cite journal | + | :::''For the specialized use of the phrase in scientific discourse, see [[Smoking gun (scientific discourse)]].'' |
| − | | author=Cleland, C.E.
| |
| − | | title=Methodological and Epistemic Differences between Historical Science and Experimental Science
| |
| − | | journal=Philosophy of Science
| |
| − | | volume=69
| |
| − | | month=September | year=2002 | pages=474–496
| |
| − | | format=PDF
| |
| − | | url=http://spot.colorado.edu/~cleland/articles/Cleland.PS.Pdf
| |
| − | | accessdate = 25.1.2012
| |
| − | }}</ref> It is always possible that future [[scientific observation|observations]] or [[theory|theoretical]] developments will depose a smoking gun and that another hypothesis (new or old) will attain status of ''[[Inference to the Best Explanation|the best explanation]]''. Some of the factors that go into transforming a trace(s) into a smoking gun for a particular hypothesis may be sociological or psychological, especially in the field of [[historical science]] where direct observation of past events is not possible and [[Scientific testing|testing]] of hypothesis producing supporting [[scientific evidence|evidence]] might be obscure. A [[Scientific research|search]] for a smoking gun may also turn up evidence against a target hypothesis.
| |
| | | | |
| − | Some historical scientists use the term "smoking gun" very losely and rampantly in their informal and popular works to degree that it became a subject of criticism by James Powell who refers to it as to the ''"tiresome methafor of 'smoking gun'"''.<ref>{{cite book|title=Night Comes to the Cretaceous |author=James Powell |publisher=Harcourt Brace |place=San Diego |year=1998 |pages=115 |isbn=978-01560-07030 |url=http://books.google.com/books?hl=no&id=eVG8lX8XnWoC |quote=One could describe this result using the tiresome metaphor of "smoking gun"...}}</ref>
| + | The phrase '''smoking gun''' is an idiom that refers to utterly compelling evidence for something. The phrase relates to the notion of a detective or police officer investigating a murder and finding someone standing over the victim, holding a gun that still has smoke issuing from it. |
| | | | |
| − | ==References==
| + | The phrase was made somewhat famous in the 1970's investigation of the [[Watergate]] scandal and taped conversations of President Nixon. Investigators saw a lot of suggestive and circumstantial evidence implicating the President in the coverup, but they kept asking for the "smoking gun". (The "smoking gun" tape turned out to be the tape of a conversation 3 days after the break-in.) |
| − | <references/>
| |
| | | | |
| − | ==See also== | + | The phrase is now used for any particularly outstanding evidence in favor of one's position on some matter. |
| − | *[[Experimental science]]
| + | |
| − | *[[Historical science]]
| + | == References == |
| − | *[[Inference to the Best Explanation]]
| + | |
| − | [[Category:Science]] | + | {{reflist}} |
| − | [[Category:Methodology of Science]]
| + | |
| | + | [[Category: Idioms]] |