Synthese 108 (2):137 - 155 (1996)
|Abstract||In recent years there have been several attempts to construct inductive arguments for some version of scientific realism. Neither the characteristics of what would count as inductive evidence nor the conclusion to be inferred have been specified in ways that escape sceptical criticism. By introducing the pragmatic criterion of manipulative efficacy for a good theory and by sharpening the specification of the necessary inductive principle, the viability of a mutually supporting pair of argument forms are defended. It is shown that by the use of these forms, taken together, a sequence of inductive arguments could be constructed, given suitable cases histories to serve as evidence. It also shown that the best inductive argument for the most daring realist claim is the weakest when compared with similarly structured arguments for less daring claims.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Peter Lipton (2000). Tracking Track Records, I. Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 74 (1):179–205.
Marc Lange (2002). Okasha on Inductive Scepticism. Philosophical Quarterly 52 (207):226-232.
R. A. Fumerton (1980). Induction and Reasoning to the Best Explanation. Philosophy of Science 47 (4):589-600.
André Juthe (2005). Argument by Analogy. Argumentation 19:1-27.
Patrick Maher (2006). The Concept of Inductive Probability. Erkenntnis 65 (2):185 - 206.
Justin P. McBrayer (2009). Cornea and Inductive Evidence. Faith and Philosophy 26 (1):77-86.
Kevin C. Klement, Deductive and Inductive Arguments. Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Wesley C. Salmon (1977). Hempel's Conception of Inductive Inference in Inductive-Statistical Explanation. Philosophy of Science 44 (2):179-185.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads13 ( #87,971 of 549,115 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,361 of 549,115 )
How can I increase my downloads?