David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1994:87 - 95 (1994)
In Bayes or Bust?, John Earman attempts to express in Bayesian terms a sense of "projectibility" in which it is logically impossible for "All emeralds are green" and "All emeralds are grue" simultaneously to be projectible. I argue that Earman overlooks an important sense in which these two hypotheses cannot both be projectible. This sense is important because it allows projectibility to be connected to lawlikeness, as Goodman intended. Whether this connection suggests a way to resolve Goodman's famous riddle remains unsettled, awaiting an account of lawlikeness. I explore one line of thought that might prove illuminating.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Marc Lange (1996). Laws of Nature, Cosmic Coincidences and Scientific Realism. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 74 (4):614 – 638.
Similar books and articles
Rosemarie Rheinwald (1993). An Epistemic Solution to Goodman's New Riddle of Induction. Synthese 95 (1):55 - 76.
John Moreland (1976). On Projecting Grue. Philosophy of Science 43 (3):363-377.
Robert Kowalenko (2012). Reply to Israel on the New Riddle of Induction. Philosophia 40 (3):549-552.
John Earman (1985). Concepts of Projectibility and the Problems of Induction. Noûs 19 (4):521-535.
John D. Norton, The Formal Equivalence of Grue and Green and How It Undoes the New Riddle of Induction.
John L. Pollock (1972). The Logic of Projectibility. Philosophy of Science 39 (3):302-314.
Rami Israel (2006). Projectibility and Explainability or How to Draw a New Picture of Inductive Practices. Journal for General Philosophy of Science 37 (2):269 - 286.
Edward S. Shirley (1981). An Unnoticed Flaw in Barker and Achinstein's Solution to Goodman's New Riddle of Induction. Philosophy of Science 48 (4):611-617.
R. G. Swinburne (1969). Projectible predicates. Analysis 30 (1):1 - 11.
Rainer Gottlob (1995). Emeralds Are No Chameleons — Why “Grue” is Not Projectible for Induction. Journal for General Philosophy of Science 26 (2):259 - 268.
Branden Fitelson (2008). Goodman's "New Riddle". Journal of Philosophical Logic 37 (6):613 - 643.
Steven J. Miller & Marcel Fredericks (1989). Some Comments on the Projectibility of Anthropological Hypotheses: Samoa Briefly Revisited. Erkenntnis 30 (3):279 - 299.
John D. Norton (2006). How the Formal Equivalence of Grue and Green Defeats What is New in the New Riddle of Induction. Synthese 150 (2):185 - 207.
John Earman (1992). Bayes or Bust? Bradford.
Added to index2011-05-29
Total downloads6 ( #211,419 of 1,099,910 )
Recent downloads (6 months)5 ( #66,909 of 1,099,910 )
How can I increase my downloads?