Reply to Israel on the New Riddle of Induction

Philosophia 40 (3):549-552 (2012)
Abstract Israel 2004 claims that numerous philosophers have misinterpreted Goodman’s original ‘New Riddle of Induction’, and weakened it in the process, because they do not define ‘grue’ as referring to past observations. Both claims are false: Goodman clearly took the riddle to concern the maximally general problem of “projecting” any type of characteristic from a given realm of objects into another, and since this problem subsumes Israel’s, Goodman formulated a stronger philosophical challenge than the latter surmises.
Keywords Nelson Goodman  grue  induction  Nicod's Criterion  confirmation  projectibility
Categories
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index
 
Download options
PhilPapers Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 5,679
External links
  • Through your library Configure

    Similar books and articles
    Barry Ward (2012). Explanation and the New Riddle of Induction. Philosophical Quarterly 62 (247):365-385.
    Branden Fitelson (2008). Goodman's “New Riddle”. Journal of Philosophical Logic 37 (6).
    John Moreland (1976). On Projecting Grue. Philosophy of Science 43 (3):363-377.
    Marc Lange (1994). Earman on the Projectibility of Grue. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1994:87 - 95.

    Analytics

    Monthly downloads

    Added to index

    2011-08-12

    Total downloads

    27 ( #45,781 of 549,087 )

    Recent downloads (6 months)

    6 ( #12,372 of 549,087 )

    How can I increase my downloads?


    My notes
    Sign in to use this feature


    Discussion
    Start a new thread
    Order:
    There  are no threads in this forum
    Nothing in this forum yet.

    Other forums