David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Biology and Philosophy 20 (4):925-926 (2005)
In science, it sometimes occurs that an event is directly observed, and on other occasions that it is not directly observed but one can make the unambiguous inference that it has occurred. Is there any difference concerning the analysis of data arising from these two situations? In this note we show that there is such a difference in one case arising frequently in genetics. The difference derives from the fact that the ability to make the unambiguous inference arises only from a restricted form of data.
|Keywords||inference observation transmission/disequilibrium disease locus gene transmission|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Joel Pust (2011). Sleeping Beauty and Direct Inference. Analysis 71 (2):290-293.
Myron L. Braunstein (2001). A Better Understanding of Inference Can Reconcile Constructivist and Direct Theories. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 25 (1):99-99.
Isaac Levi (1981). Direct Inference and Confirmational Conditionalization. Philosophy of Science 48 (4):532-552.
Mark Day & George S. Botterill (2008). Contrast, Inference and Scientific Realism. Synthese 160 (2):249 - 267.
William G. Lycan (2002). Explanation and Epistemology. In Paul K. Moser (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Epistemology. Oxford University Press. 413.
Paul D. Thorn (2012). Two Problems of Direct Inference. Erkenntnis 76 (3):299-318.
P. Kosso (2000). The Empirical Status of Symmetries in Physics. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 51 (1):81-98.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads4 ( #198,584 of 1,088,810 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #42,743 of 1,088,810 )
How can I increase my downloads?