What is, according to Peirce, the method of science? Is it the only way to fix belief?

Abstract

In this paper, I explore Peirce's claim that the method of science is the only way to permanently fix, or settle belief. Peirce considers four different methods of forming beliefs: The method of tenacity, the method of authority, the a priori method, and the method of science. Peirce argues that the first three methods of forming beliefs cannot fix belief because they are inconsistent with what Peirce calls the hypothesis of reality- the hypothesis that there is an external world independent of human opinion. Peirce argues that methods that are inconsistent with this hypothesis form beliefs that are subject to doubt, and cannot therefore fix belief. The method of science is however consistent with the hypothesis of reality and therefore can fix belief.

I argue that Peirce is correct that the method of science is the only way to fix belief if one accepts the pragmatist theory of belief. Whilst one could object to Peirce that the hypothesis of reality is not certainly true, Peirce would not be swayed by such sceptical doubts, and he gives us positive reasons to reject them.