In World Hypotheses, Pepper argues that logical positivism was in error, because there is no such thing as data free from interpretation, and that root metaphors are necessary in epistemology.
He identifies the strengths and weaknesses of each of the world hypotheses as well as the paradoxical and sometimes mystifying effects of the effort to synthesize them.
[1] Pepper begins by demonstrating the very weak positions of utter skepticism and dogmatism while explaining that each are essentially two sides of the same coin.
And depending on the choice of your root metaphor, different criteria exist as to what constitutes good evidence.
The root metaphor of mechanism (philosophy) is identification of the parts and processes and their response to stimulation from the environment.
The historical-context, or contextualist, metaphor, is selection among events, contexts, and interpretations and weaving these into coherent and meaningful histories.
Charles Sanders Peirce, William James, Henri Bergson, and John Dewey are examples of contextualist philosophers.
A seed planted in favorable conditions, unfolding and maturing into a tree, is an example of an organismic system.