David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Predictions about the future and unrestricted universal generalizations are never logically implied by our observational evidence, which is limited to particular facts in the present and past. Nevertheless, propositions of these and other kinds are often said to be conﬁrmed by observational evidence. A natural place to begin the study of conﬁrmation theory is to consider what it means to say that some evidence E conﬁrms a hypothesis H.
|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
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Patrick Maher (2004). Probability Captures the Logic of Scientific Confirmation. In Christopher Hitchcock (ed.), Contemporary Debates in Philosophy of Science. Blackwell Pub. 69--93.
Neil Tennant (2006). A Note on the Irrelevance of Probabilistic Irrelevance. Analysis 66 (289):32–35.
Colin Howson & Allan Franklin (1991). Maher, Mendeleev and Bayesianism. Philosophy of Science 58 (4):574-585.
Hilary Greaves & Wayne C. Myrvold (2010). Everett and Evidence. In Simon Saunders, Jonathan Barrett, Adrian Kent & David Wallace (eds.), Many Worlds? Everett, Quantum Theory, and Reality. Oxford University Press
Elisabeth A. Lloyd (2010). Conﬁrmation and Robustness of Climate Models. Philosophy of Science 77 (5):971–984.
Peter Kosso & Cynthia Kosso (1995). Central Place Theory and the Reciprocity Between Theory and Evidence. Philosophy of Science 62 (4):581-598.
Added to index2010-12-22
Total downloads29 ( #130,250 of 1,790,148 )
Recent downloads (6 months)8 ( #105,713 of 1,790,148 )
How can I increase my downloads?