Search results for 'inference to the best explanation' (try it on Scholar)

1000+ found
Order:
  1. Peter Lipton (2004). Inference to the Best Explanation. Routledge/Taylor and Francis Group.
    How do we go about weighing evidence, testing hypotheses, and making inferences? The model of " inference to the best explanation " -- that we infer the hypothesis that would, if correct, provide the best explanation of the available evidence--offers a compelling account of inferences both in science and in ordinary life. Widely cited by epistemologists and philosophers of science, IBE has nonetheless remained little more than a slogan. Now this influential work has been (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   204 citations  
  2. Adolfas Mackonis (2013). Inference to the Best Explanation, Coherence and Other Explanatory Virtues. Synthese 190 (6):975-995.
    This article generalizes the explanationist account of inference to the best explanation. It draws a clear distinction between IBE and abduction and presents abduction as the first step of IBE. The second step amounts to the evaluation of explanatory power, which consist in the degree of explanatory virtues that a hypothesis exhibits. Moreover, even though coherence is the most often cited explanatory virtue, on pain of circularity, it should not be treated as one of the explanatory (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  3.  79
    David H. Glass (2007). Coherence Measures and Inference to the Best Explanation. Synthese 157 (3):275-296.
    This paper considers an application of work on probabilistic measures of coherence to inference to the best explanation. Rather than considering information reported from different sources, (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   8 citations  
  4.  19
    Aleta Quinn (forthcoming). Phylogenetic Inference to the Best Explanation and the Bad Lot Argument. Synthese:1-15.
    I respond to the bad lot argument in the context of biological systematics. The response relies on the historical nature of biological systematics and on the availability of pattern explanations. The basic assumption of common descent enables systematic methodology to naturally generate candidate explanatory hypotheses. However, systematists face a related challenge in the issue of character analysis. Character analysis is the central problem for contemporary systematics, yet the general problem of which it is a case—what counts as evidence?—has not been (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  5.  14
    Raphael Scholl (2015). Inference to the Best Explanation in the Catch-22: How Much Autonomy for Mill’s Method of Difference? European Journal for Philosophy of Science 5 (1):89-110.
    In his seminal Inference to the Best Explanation, Peter Lipton adopted a causal view of explanation and a broadly Millian view of how causal knowledge is obtained. This made his account vulnerable to critics who charged that Inference to the Best Explanation is merely a dressed-up version of Mill’s methods, which in the critics’ view do the real inductive work. Lipton advanced two arguments to protect Inference to the (...) Explanation against this line of criticism: the problem of multiple differences and the problem of inferred differences. Lipton claimed that these two problems show Mill’s method of difference to be largely unworkable unless it is embedded in an explanationist framework. Here I consider both arguments as well as the best Millian defense against them. Since the existing Millian defense is only partially successful, I will develop a new and improved account. As an integral part of the argument, I show that my solutions to the problems of multiple and inferred differences offer new insight into Lipton’s main case study: Ignaz Semmelweis’s discovery of the cause of childbed fever. I conclude that the method of difference can overcome Lipton’s challenges outside an explanationist framework. (shrink)
    No categories
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  6.  81
    Gregor Betz (2013). Justifying Inference to the Best Explanation as a Practical Meta-Syllogism on Dialectical Structures. Synthese 190 (16):3553-3578.
    This article discusses how & lt ; span class =' Hi '& gt ; inference & lt ;/ span & gt ; to the best explanation can be justified as a practical meta - argument. It is, firstly, justified as a practical argument insofar as accepting the best explanation as true can be shown to further a specific aim. And because this aim is a discursive one which proponents can rationally pursue in — and relative (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  7.  11
    David Godden (2014). Modeling Corroborative Evidence: Inference to the Best Explanation as Counter–Rebuttal. Argumentation 28 (2):187-220.
    Corroborative evidence has a dual function in argument. Primarily, it functions to provide direct evidence supporting the main conclusion. But it also has a secondary, bolstering function which increases the probative value of some other piece of evidence in the argument. This paper argues that the bolstering effect of corroborative evidence is legitimate, and can be explained as counter–rebuttal achieved through inference to the best explanation. A model (argument diagram) of corroborative evidence, representing its structure and operation (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  8. Stefan Dragulinescu (forthcoming). Inference to the Best Explanation and Mechanisms in Medicine. Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics:1-22.
    This article considers the prospects of inference to the best explanation as a method of confirming causal claims vis-à-vis the medical evidence of mechanisms. I show that IBE is actually descriptive of how scientists reason when choosing among hypotheses, that it is amenable to the balance/weight distinction, a pivotal pair of concepts in the philosophy of evidence, and that it can do justice to interesting features of the interplay between mechanistic and population level assessments.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  9.  9
    Fabrice Pataut (2016). Comments on “Parsimony and Inference to the Best Mathematical Explanation”. Synthese 193 (2):351-363.
    The author of “Parsimony and inference to the best mathematical explanation” argues for platonism by way of an enhanced indispensability argument based on an inference to yet better mathematical optimization explanations in the natural sciences. Since such explanations yield beneficial trade-offs between stronger mathematical existential claims and fewer concrete ontological commitments than those involved in merely good mathematical explanations, one must countenance the mathematical objects that play a theoretical role in them via an application of the (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  10. Ruth Weintraub (2013). Induction and Inference to the Best Explanation. Philosophical Studies 166 (1):203-216.
    In this paper I adduce a new argument in support of the claim that IBE is an autonomous form of inference, based on a familiar, yet surprisingly, under-discussed, problem for Hume’s theory of induction. I then use some insights thereby gleaned to argue for the claim that induction is really IBE, and draw some normative conclusions.
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  11.  24
    Philip Clayton (1997). Inference to the Best Explanation. Zygon 32 (3):377-391.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  12. Peter Lipton (2003). Inference to the Best Explanation. Routledge.
    How do we go about weighing evidence, testing hypotheses, and making inferences? According to the model of _Inference to the Best Explanation_, we work out what to infer from the evidence by thinking about what would actually explain that evidence, and we take the ability of a hypothesis to explain the evidence as a sign that the hypothesis is correct. In _Inference to the Best Explanation_, Peter Lipton gives this important and influential idea the development and assessment it (...)
    No categories
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   23 citations  
  13. Joel Katzav (2013). Hybrid Models, Climate Models, and Inference to the Best Explanation. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 64 (1):107-129.
    I examine the warrants we have in light of the empirical successes of a kind of model I call ‘ hybrid models ’, a kind that includes climate models among its members. I argue that these warrants ’ strengths depend on inferential virtues that are not just explanatory virtues, contrary to what would be the case if inference to the best explanation provided the warrants. I also argue that the warrants in question, unlike those IBE provides, guide (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   6 citations  
  14. W. Roche & E. Sober (2013). Explanatoriness is Evidentially Irrelevant, or Inference to the Best Explanation Meets Bayesian Confirmation Theory. Analysis 73 (4):659-668.
    In the world of philosophy of science, the dominant theory of confirmation is Bayesian. In the wider philosophical world, the idea of inference to the best explanation exerts a considerable influence. Here we place the two worlds in collision, using Bayesian confirmation theory to argue that explanatoriness is evidentially irrelevant.
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   6 citations  
  15.  18
    Igor Douven & Sylvia Wenmackers (forthcoming). Inference to the Best Explanation Versus Bayes’s Rule in a Social Setting. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science:axv025.
    This article compares inference to the best explanation with Bayes’s rule in a social setting, specifically, in the context of a variant of the Hegselmann–Krause model in which agents not only update their belief states on the basis of evidence they receive directly from the world, but also take into account the belief states of their fellow agents. So far, the update rules mentioned have been studied only in an individualistic setting, and it is known that in (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  16.  32
    Igor Douven (2013). Inference to the Best Explanation, Dutch Books, and Inaccuracy Minimisation. Philosophical Quarterly 63 (252):428-444.
    Bayesians have traditionally taken a dim view of the Inference to the Best Explanation, arguing that, if IBE is at variance with Bayes ' rule, then it runs afoul of the dynamic Dutch book argument. More recently, Bayes ' rule has been claimed to be superior on grounds of conduciveness to our epistemic goal. The present paper aims to show that neither of these arguments succeeds in undermining IBE.
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   6 citations  
  17. Daniel G. Campos (2011). On the Distinction Between Peirce's Abduction and Lipton's Inference to the Best Explanation. Synthese 180 (3):419 - 442.
    I argue against the tendency in the philosophy of science literature to link abduction to the inference to the best explanation (IBE), and in particular, to claim that Peireean abduction is a conceptual predecessor to IBE. This is not to discount either abduction or IBE. Rather the purpose of this paper is to clarify the relation between Peireean abduction and IBE in accounting for ampliative inference in science. This paper aims at a proper classification—not justification—of types (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   7 citations  
  18. Timothy Day & Harold Kincaid (1994). Putting Inference to the Best Explanation in its Place. Synthese 98 (2):271-295.
    This paper discusses the nature and the status of inference to the best explanation. We outline the foundational role given IBE by its defenders and the (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   27 citations  
  19. Leah Henderson (2014). Bayesianism and Inference to the Best Explanation. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 65 (4):687-715.
    Two of the most influential theories about scientific inference are inference to the best explanation and Bayesianism. How are they related? Bas van Fraassen has claimed that IBE and Bayesianism are incompatible rival theories, as any probabilistic version of IBE would violate Bayesian conditionalization. In response, several authors have defended the view that IBE is compatible with Bayesian updating. They claim that the explanatory considerations in IBE are taken into account by the Bayesian because the Bayesian (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  20.  50
    David H. Glass (2012). Inference to the Best Explanation: Does It Track Truth? Synthese 185 (3):411-427.
    In the form of inference known as inference to the best explanation there are various ways to characterise what is meant by the best explanation. This paper considers a number of such characterisations including several based on confirmation measures and several based on coherence measures. The goal is to find a measure which adequately captures what is meant by 'best' and which also yields the truth with a high degree of probability. Computer simulations (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  21. Gregory W. Dawes (2013). Belief is Not the Issue: A Defence of Inference to the Best Explanation. Ratio 26 (1):62-78.
    Defences of inference to the best explanation (IBE) frequently associate IBE with scientific realism, the idea that it is reasonable to believe our best scientific theories (...). I argue that this linkage is unfortunate. IBE does not warrant belief, since the fact that a theory is the best available explanation does not show it to be (even probably) true. What IBE does warrant is acceptance: taking a proposition as a premise in theoretical and/or practical reasoning. We ought to accept our best scientific theories since they are the theories that are most likely to lead to the goal of science, which is that of knowledge. In support of this claim I invoke Bill Lycan's Panglossian reflections regarding Mother Nature.1. (shrink)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  22. Igor Douven (1999). Inference to the Best Explanation Made Coherent. Philosophy of Science 66 (Supplement):S424-S435.
    Van Fraassen (1989) argues that Inference to the Best Explanation is incoherent in the sense that adopting it as a rule for belief change will make one susceptible to a dynamic Dutch book. The present paper argues against this. A strategy is described that allows us to infer to the best explanation free of charge.
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   18 citations  
  23. Igor Douven (2002). Testing Inference to the Best Explanation. Synthese 130 (3):355-377.
    Inference to the Best Explanation has become the subject of a livelydebate in the philosophy of science. Scientific realists maintain, while scientificantirealists deny, that it is a compelling rule of inference. It seems that anyattempt to settle this debate empirically must beg the question against theantirealist. The present paper argues that this impression is misleading. A methodis described that, by combining Glymour '' s theory of bootstrapping and Hacking '' sarguments from microscopy, allows us to test (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   12 citations  
  24. Peter Lipton (2007). Alien Abduction: Inference to the Best Explanation and the Management of Testimony. Episteme 4 (3):238-251.
    This paper considers how we decide whether to believe what we are told. Inference to the Best Explanation, a popular general account of non-demonstrative reasoning, is applied to this task. The core idea of this application is that we believe what we are told when the truth of what we are told would figure in the best explanation of the fact that we were told it. We believe the fact uttered when it (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   9 citations  
  25. Marcel Weber (2009). The Crux of Crucial Experiments: Duhem's Problems and Inference to the Best Explanation. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 60 (1):19-49.
    Going back at least to Duhem, there is a tradition of thinking that crucial experiments are impossible in science. I analyse Duhem's arguments and show that they are based on the excessively strong assumption that only deductive reasoning is permissible in experimental science. This opens the possibility that some principle of inductive inference could provide a sufficient reason for preferring one among a group of hypotheses on the basis of an appropriately controlled experiment. To be sure, there are analogues (...)
    Direct download (11 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   5 citations  
  26. Andrew Melnyk (1994). Inference to the Best Explanation and Other Minds. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 72 (4):482-91.
    Robert Pargetter has argued that we know other minds through an inference to the best explanation. My aim is to show, by criticising Pargetter's account, that this approach to the problem of other minds cannot, as it stands, deliver the goods; it might be part of the right response to the problem, but it cannot be the whole story. More precisely, I will claim that Pargetter does not successfully reconstruct how ordinary people in everyday life come reasonably (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  27. Axel Gelfert (2010). Reconsidering the Role of Inference to the Best Explanation in the Epistemology of Testimony. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 41 (4):386-396.
    In his work on the epistemology of testimony, Peter Lipton developed an account of testimonial inference that aimed at descriptive adequacy as well as justificatory sophistication. According (...) totestimonial inference to the best explanation ‟, we accept what a speaker tells us because the truth of her claim figures in the best explanation of the fact that she made it. In the present paper, I argue for a modification of this picture. In particular, I argue that IBE plays a dual role in the management and justification of testimony. On the one hand, the coherence and success of our testimony - based projects provides general abductive support for a default stance of testimonial acceptance ; on the other hand, we are justified in rejecting specific testimonial claims whenever the best explanation of the instances of testimony we encounter entails, or makes probable, the falsity or unreliability of the testimony in question. (shrink)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  28.  86
    Gerhard Minnameier (2004). Peirce-Suit of Truth – Why Inference to the Best Explanation and Abduction Ought Not to Be Confused. Erkenntnis 60 (1):75-105.
    It is well known that the process of scientific inquiry, according to Peirce, is drivenby three types of inference, namely abduction, deduction, and induction. What isbehind these labels is, however, not so clear. In particular, the common identificationof abduction with Inference to the Best Explanation (IBE) begs the question,since IBE appears to be covered by Peirce's concept of induction, not that of abduction.Consequently, abduction ought to be distinguished from IBE, at least on Peirce's account. The (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   8 citations  
  29. Yemima Ben-Menahem (1990). The Inference to the Best Explanation. Erkenntnis 33 (3):319-44.
    In a situation in which several explanations compete, is the one that is better qua explanation also the one we should regard as the more likely to be true? Realists usually answer in the affirmative. They then go on to argue that since realism provides the best explanation for the success of science, realism can be inferred to. Nonrealists, on the other hand, answer the above question in the negative, thereby renouncing the inference to realism. In (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   11 citations  
  30.  73
    Harmon R. Holcomb (1996). Just so Stories and Inference to the Best Explanation in Evolutionary Psychology. Minds and Machines 6 (4):525-540.
    Evolutionary psychology is a science in the making, working toward the goal of showing how psychological adaptation underlies much human behavior. The knee-jerk reaction that sociobiology is unscientific because it tells just-so stories has become a common charge against evolutionary psychology as well. My main positive thesis is that inference to the best explanation is a proper method for evolutionary analyses, and it supplies a new perspective on the issues raised in Schlinger's (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  31. Valeriano Iranzo (2007). Abduction and Inference to the Best Explanation. Theoria 22 (3):339-346.
    Aliseda’s Abductive Reasoning is focused on the logical problem of abduction. My paper, in contrast, deals with the epistemic problems raised by this sort of inference. I analyze the relation between abduction and inference to the best explanation (IBE). Firstly a heuristic and a normative interpretation of IBE are distinguished. The epistemic problem is particularly pressing for the latter interpretation, since it is devoid of content without specific epistemic criteria for separating acceptable explanations from those which (...)
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  32. Steven Rappaport (1996). Inference to the Best Explanation: Is It Really Different From Mill's Methods? Philosophy of Science 63 (1):65-80.
    Peter Lipton has attempted to flesh out a model of Inference to the Best Explanation (IBE) by clarifying explanation in terms of a causal model. But (...) Lipton's account of explanation makes an adequate explanation depend on a principle which is virtually identical to Mill's Method of Difference. This has the result of collapsing IBE on Lipton's account of it into causal inference as conceived by the Causal-Inference model of induction. According to this model, many of our inductions are inferences from effects to their probable causes, and Mill's Methods are canons to guide such inferences. Thus, Lipton's account of IBE fails to represent an advance over the already familiar Causal-Inference Model of induction. (shrink)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  33.  5
    Theo Af Kuipers (2004). Inference to the Best Theory, Rather Than Inference to the Best Explanation. Kinds of Abduction and Induction. In Friedrich Stadler (ed.), Vienna Circle Institute Yearbook. Springer 25-51.
    An interesting consequence of the structuralist theory of truth approximation, as developed in my From Instrumentalism to Constructive Realism , henceforth ICR, concerns so-called ‘inference to the best explanation’ . It will be argued that this popular rule among scientific realists can better be replaced by, various kinds of, ‘inference to the best theory’.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   5 citations  
  34. Stathis Psillos (2004). Inference to the Best Explanation and Bayesianism. Vienna Circle Institute Yearbook 11:83-91.
    Niiniluoto has offered an incisive and comprehensive review of the recent debates about abduction. There is little on which I disagree with him. So, in this commentary, I shall try to cast some doubts to the attempts to render Inference to the Best Explanation within a Bayesian framework.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  35.  52
    James H. Fetzer (2002). Propensities and Frequencies: Inference to the Best Explanation. Synthese 132 (1-2):27 - 61.
    An approach to inference to the best explanation integrating a Popperianconception of natural laws together with a modified Hempelian account of explanation, one the one hand, and Hacking's law of likelihood (in its nomicguise), on the other, which provides a robust abductivist model of sciencethat appears to overcome the obstacles that confront its inductivist,deductivist, and hypothetico-deductivist alternatives.This philosophy of scienceclarifies and illuminates some fundamental aspects of ontology and epistemology, especially concerning the relations between frequencies and (...). Among the most important elements of this conception is thecentral role of degrees of nomic expectability in explanation, prediction,and inference, for which this investigation provides a theoretical defense. (shrink)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  36.  92
    John Bigelow (2010). Quine, Mereology, and Inference to the Best Explanation. Logique Et Analyse 53 (212):465.
    Given Quine's views on philosophical methodology, he should not have taken the axioms of classical mereology to be "self-evident", or "analytic"; but rather, he should have set out to justify them by what might be broadly called an "inference to the best explanation". He does very little to this end. In particular, he does little to examine alternative theories, to see if there might be anything they could explain better than classical mereology can. I argue that there (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  37.  93
    Jochen Briesen (2008). Skepticism, Externalism, and Inference to the Best Explanation. Abstracta 4 (1):5-26.
    This paper focuses on a combination of the antiskeptical strategies offered by semantic externalism and the inference to the best explanation. I argue that the most difficult problems of the two strategies can be solved, if the strategies are combined: The strategy offered by semantic externalism is successful against standard skeptical brain-in-a-vat arguments. But the strategy is ineffective, if the skeptical argument is referring to the recent-envatment scenario. However, by focusing on the scenario of recent envatment the (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  38.  9
    David Harker, Inference to the Best Explanation and the Importance of Peculiarly Explanatory Virtues.
    Inference to the best explanation has at times appeared almost indistinguishable from a rule that recommends simply that we should infer the hypothesis which is most plausible given available evidence. In this paper I argue that avoiding this collapse requires the identification of peculiarly explanatory virtues and consider Woodward's concept of invariance as an example of such a virtue. An additional benefit of augmenting IBE with Woodward's model of causal explanation is also suggested.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  39.  38
    Brian Haig & Russil Durrant (2002). Adaptationism and Inference to the Best Explanation. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 25 (4):520-521.
    Andrews et al. effectively argue that, despite prominent criticism, adaptationism can be a viable research strategy. We agree. In our complementary commentary, we discuss the neglected method of inference to the best explanation and argue that it is a valuable addition to the adaptationist's methodological practice.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  40.  40
    David Chart, Inference to the Best Explanation, Bayesianism, and Feminist Bank Tellers.
    Inference to the Best Explanation and Bayesianism have both been proposed as descriptions of the way that people make inferences. This paper argues that one result from cognitive psychology, the "feminist bank teller" experiment, suggests that people use Inference to the Best Explanation rather than Bayesian techniques.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  41.  11
    Selman Halabi (2005). A Useful Anachronism: John Locke, the Corpuscular Philosophy, and Inference to the Best Explanation. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 36 (2):241-259.
    Locke is often interpreted as having attempted to build a foundation for knowledge based on ideas. However, textual evidence shows that the corpuscular philosophy is also a fundamental part of that foundation. Somewhat anachronistically, but also very usefully, Locke can be described as inferring corpuscularianism by an inference to the best explanation. Locke felt justified in believing that the corpuscular philosophy was the correct description of the world because it provided us with a better explanation of (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  42.  34
    Valeriano Iranzo (2008). Bayesianism and Inference to the Best Explanation. Theoria 23 (1):89-106.
    Bayesianism and Inference to the best explanation (IBE) are two different models of inference. Recently there has been some debate about the possibility of “bayesianizing” IBE. Firstly I explore several alternatives to include explanatory considerations in Bayes’s Theorem. Then I distinguish two different interpretationsof prior probabilities: “IBE-Bayesianism” (IBE-Bay) and “frequentist-Bayesianism” (Freq-Bay). After detailing the content of the latter, I propose a rule for assessing the priors. I also argue that Freq-Bay: (i) endorses a role for explanatory (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  43.  10
    Harmon R. Holcomb Iii (1996). Just so Stories and Inference to the Best Explanation in Evolutionary Psychology. Minds and Machines 6 (4):525-540.
    Evolutionary psychology is a science in the making, working toward the goal of showing how psychological adaptation underlies much human behavior. The knee-jerk reaction that sociobiology is unscientific because it tells “just-so stories” has become a common charge against evolutionary psychology as well. My main positive thesis is that inference to the best explanation is a proper method for evolutionary analyses, and it supplies a new perspective on the issues raised in Schlinger's (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  44. Mark Alfano (2007). A Critical Discussion Of The Compatibility Of Bayesianism And Inference To The Best Explanation. Philosophical Writings 34 (1).
    In this paper I critique Peter Lipton’s attempt to deal with the threat of Bayesianism to the normative aspect of his project in Inference to the Best Explanation. I consider the five approaches Lipton proposes for reconciling the doxastic recommendations of Inference to the Best Explanation with BA’s: IBE gives a ‘boost’ to the posterior probability of particularly ‘lovely’ hypotheses after the Bayesian calculation is performed; IBE helps us to set the likelihood of evidence (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  45. Tania Lombrozo & Daniel Wilkenfeld (2015). Inference to the Best Explanation Versus Explaining for the Best Inference. Science and Education 24 (9 - 10):1059-1077.
    In pedagogical contexts and in everyday life, we often come to believe something because it would best explain the data. What is it about the explanatory endeavor that makes it essential to everyday learning and to scientific progress? There are at least two plausible answers. On one view, there is something special about having true explanations. This view is highly intuitive: it’s clear why true explanations might improve one’s epistemic position. However, there is another possibility—it could be that the (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  46. Adolfas Mackonis (2011). Psychological Adequacy and Ontological Commitments of Inference to the Best Explanation. Problemos 79:41-54.
    The article explicates psychological and ontological aspects of Inference to the Best Explanation . IBE is a psychological theory, because cognitive science studies support IBE as descriptively true and psychologically adequate theory, i.e., people perceive best explanations as true and follow the rule of IBE in their reasoning. Moreover, different features of IBE imply that conclusions of IBE can be true only in a world with a very particular ontological constitution. Realism about the external world, the (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  47.  10
    Matthew Dentith (2016). When Inferring to a Conspiracy Might Be the Best Explanation. Social Epistemology 31.
    Conspiracy theories are typically thought to be examples of irrational beliefs, and thus unlikely to be warranted. However, recent work in Philosophy has challenged the claim that belief in conspiracy theories is irrational, showing that in a range of cases, belief in conspiracy theories is warranted. However, it is still often said that conspiracy theories are unlikely relative to non-conspiratorial explanations which account for the same phenomena. However, such arguments turn out to rest upon how we define what gets counted (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  48. Sorin Ioan Bangu (2008). Inference to the Best Explanation and Mathematical Realism. Synthese 160 (1):13-20.
    Arguing for mathematical realism on the basis of Field’s explanationist version of the Quine–Putnam Indispensability argument, Alan Baker has recently claimed to have found an instance of a genuine mathematical explanation of a physical phenomenon. While I agree that Baker presents a very interesting example in which mathematics plays an essential explanatory role, I show that this example, and the argument built upon it, begs the question against the mathematical nominalist.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   17 citations  
  49.  42
    Clark Glymour (2012). On the Possibility of Inference to the Best Explanation. Journal of Philosophical Logic 41 (2):461-469.
    Various proposals have suggested that an adequate explanatory theory should reduce the number or the cardinality of the set of logically independent claims that need be accepted in order to entail a body of data. A (and perhaps the only) well-formed proposal of this kind is William Kneale’s: an explanatory theory should be finitely axiomatizable but it’s set of logical consequences in the data language should not be finitely axiomatizable. Craig and Vaught showed that Kneale theories (almost) always exist for (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  50. Greg Frost-Arnold (2010). The No-Miracles Argument for Realism: Inference to an Unacceptable Explanation. Philosophy of Science 77 (1):35-58.
    I argue that a certain type of naturalist should not accept a prominent version of the no-miracles argument (NMA). First, scientists (usually) do not accept explanations whose explanans-statements neither generate novel predictions nor unify apparently disparate established claims. Second, scientific realism (as it appears in the NMA) is an explanans that makes no new predictions and fails to unify disparate established claims. Third, many proponents of the NMA explicitly adopt a naturalism that forbids philosophy of science from using any methods (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   6 citations  
1 — 50 / 1000