Philosophy of Science 38 (1):54-63 (1971)
|Abstract||Inductive methods can be used to estimate the accuracies of inductive methods. Call a method immodest if it estimates that it is at least as accurate as any of its rivals. It would be unreasonable to adopt any but an immodest method. Under certain assumptions, exactly one of Carnap's lambda-methods is immodest. This may seem to solve the problem of choosing among the lambda-methods; but sometimes the immodest lambda-method is λ =0, which it would not be reasonable to adopt. We should therefore reconsider the assumptions that led to this conclusion: for instance, the measure of accuracy|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Martin Calkins (2001). Casuistry and the Business Case Method. Business Ethics Quarterly 11 (2):237-259.
Werner Loh (1992). Kant-Forschungen AlS Beispiel für Selbstverschuldeten Methodenmangel. Journal for General Philosophy of Science 23 (1):105 - 128.
Cory Juhl (1993). Bayesianism and Reliable Scientific Inquiry. Philosophy of Science 60 (2):302-319.
Jan-Willem Romeijn (2004). Hypotheses and Inductive Predictions. Synthese 141 (3):333 - 364.
Fred Wilson (2010). Hume and the Role of Testimony in Knowledge. Episteme 7 (1):58-78.
Roberto Festa (1996). Analogy and Exchangeability in Predictive Inferences. Erkenntnis 45 (2-3):229 - 252.
Romeyn, J.-W. (2004). Hypotheses and Inductive Predictions. Synthese 141 (3):333-364.
Stuart S. Glennan (1994). Why There Can't Be a Logic of Induction. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1994:78 - 86.
Stephen Spielman (1972). Lewis on Immodest Inductive Models. Philosophy of Science 39 (3):375-377.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads18 ( #67,558 of 549,087 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,317 of 549,087 )
How can I increase my downloads?