Philosophy of Science 67 (3):207 (2000)
|Abstract||In seeking general accounts of evidence, confirmation, or inference, philosophers have looked to logical relationships between evidence and hypotheses. Such logics of evidential relationship, whether hypothetico-deductive, Bayesian, or instantiationist fail to capture or be relevant to scientific practice. They require information that scientists do not generally have (e.g., an exhaustive set of hypotheses), while lacking slots within which to include considerations to which scientists regularly appeal (e.g., error probabilities). Building on my co-symposiasts contributions, I suggest some directions in which a new and more adequate philosophy of evidence can move|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Kent W. Staley (2002). What Experiment Did We Just Do? Counterfactual Error Statistics and Uncertainties About the Reference Class. Philosophy of Science 69 (2):279-299.
Wendy S. Parker (2008). Computer Simulation Through an Error-Statistical Lens. Synthese 163 (3):371 - 384.
Gregory Wheeler (2000). Error Statistics and Duhem's Problem. Philosophy of Science 67 (3):410-420.
Aysel Dogan (2005). Confirmation of Scientific Hypotheses as Relations. Journal for General Philosophy of Science 36 (2):243 - 259.
Kent Staley (2012). Strategies for Securing Evidence Through Model Criticism. European Journal for Philosophy of Science 2 (1):21-43.
Deborah G. Mayo (1997). Error Statistics and Learning From Error: Making a Virtue of Necessity. Philosophy of Science 64 (4):212.
Kent Staley (2008). Error-Statistical Elimination of Alternative Hypotheses. Synthese 163 (3):397 - 408.
Kent W. Staley, Strategies for Securing Evidence Through Model Criticism: An Error-Statistical Perspective.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads19 ( #64,434 of 549,546 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #63,397 of 549,546 )
How can I increase my downloads?