David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jonathan Jenkins Ichikawa
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1990:325 - 332 (1990)
This paper claims that adoption of Bayes's theorem as the schema for the appraisal of scientific theories can greatly reduce the distance between Kuhnians and logical empiricists. It is argued that plausibility considerations, which Kuhn considered outside of the logic of science, can be construed as prior probabilities, which play an indispensable role in the logic of science. Problems concerning likelihoods, especially the likelihood on the "catchall," are also considered. Severe difficulties concerning the significance of this probability arise in the evaluation of individual theories, but they can be avoided by restricting our judgments to comparative assessments of competing theories.
|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
Helena Likwornik (2015). Who’s Afraid of the Big Bad Wolf? The Interweaving of Values and Science. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 45 (3):382-403.
Gordon Belot (forthcoming). Curve-Fitting for Bayesians? British Journal for the Philosophy of Science:axv061.
John R. Welch (2011). Decision Theory and Cognitive Choice. European Journal for Philosophy of Science 1 (2):147-172.
John R. Welch (2013). New Tools for Theory Choice and Theory Diagosis. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 44 (3):318-329.
Harold I. Brown (2005). Incommensurability Reconsidered. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 36 (1):149-169.
Similar books and articles
Lefteris Farmakis (2008). Did Tom Kuhn Actually Meet Tom Bayes? Erkenntnis 68 (1):41 - 53.
Richard Swinburne (2002). Introduction to Bayes's Theorem. In Bayes’s Theorem. Oxford Univ Pr
Patrick Enfield (1991). Realism, Empiricism and Scientific Revolutions. Philosophy of Science 58 (3):468-485.
James Joyce (2008). Bayes' Theorem. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
Harold I. Brown (1994). Reason, Judgement and Bayes's Law. Philosophy of Science 61 (3):351-369.
Alisa Bokulich (2006). Heisenberg Meets Kuhn: Closed Theories and Paradigms. Philosophy of Science 73 (1):90-107.
Branden Fitelson & Neil Thomason (2008). Bayesians Sometimes Cannot Ignore Even Very Implausible Theories (Even Ones That Have Not yet Been Thought Of). Australasian Journal of Logic 6:25-36.
Alexander Bird (2003). Kuhn, Nominalism, and Empiricism. Philosophy of Science 70 (4):690-719.
Jack C. Carloye (1985). Normal Science and the Extension of Theories. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 36 (3):241-256.
Harold I. Brown (1983). Incommensurability. Inquiry 26 (1):3 – 29.
William O'Donohue (1993). The Spell of Kuhn on Psychology: An Exegetical Elixir. Philosophical Psychology 6 (3):267 – 287.
Andy Pickering (2001). Reading The. Perspectives on Science 9 (4).
Richard Swinburne (2008). Bayes's Theorem. Gogoa 8 (1):138.
S. K. Arun Murthi & Sundar Sarukkai (2009). Multisemiosis and Incommensurability. International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 23 (3):297-311.
Added to index2011-05-29
Total downloads29 ( #147,642 of 1,938,823 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #458,338 of 1,938,823 )
How can I increase my downloads?