A Reflection on the Distinction between the Context of Discovery and the Context of Justification in Philosophy and Methodology of Science

Justifiability of knowledge statements has always been of the philosophers’ most important and original concerns. The introduction of the distinction between the context of discovery and the context of justification is also an attempt to answer this dilemma. The aim of the Context of discovery is to discover the context of scientific laws and theories, while the context of justification aims at justifying the context of theories. Each proponent of discovery/justification distinction, has, according to his/her philosophical approach, some interpretation of this distinction: temporal and logical Sequence of these two processes, considering the context of discovery as a factual and historical process of science and the context of justification as a normative framework for science, logical analysis of the context of justification vs. the context of discovery with its empirical analysis, belonging of the context of justification to the scope of philosophy of science and the context of discovery being particular to the field of history, psychology and sociology of science, the difference of the questions pointing out to each context, separation of internal and external history of science, normative perspective of discovery vs. factual perspective of justification. Using such a distinction in understanding the method of science can be criticized concerning: uncertainty of both contexts as temporal and logical processes, intervention of logical factors in the context of discovery, the distinction not being limited to the two contexts and the necessity of existing at least a three-fold distinction, the irrational and non-logical factors involved in the context of justification, the Para-normative growth of science and the diversity not being explained in the context of discovery.