Why the pessimistic induction is a fallacy

Putnam and Laudan separately argue that the falsity of past scientific theo ries gives us reason to doubt the truth of current theories. Their argument s have been highly influential, and have generated a significant literature over the past couple of decades. Most of this literature attempts to defen d scientific realism by attacking the historical evidence on which the prem ises of the relevant argument are based. However, I argue that both Putnam' s and Laudan's arguments are fallacious, and hence attacking their premises is unnecessary. The paper concludes with a discussion of the further histo rical evidence that would be required if the pessimistic induction is to pr esent a serious threat to scientific realism.