Why philosophical theories of evidence are (and ought to be) ignored by scientists

Philosophy of Science 67 (3):192 (2000)
There are two reasons, I claim, scientists do and should ignore standard philosophical theories of objective evidence: (1) Such theories propose concepts that are far too weak to give scientists what they want from evidence, viz., a good reason to believe a hypothesis; and (2) They provide concepts that make the evidential relationship a priori, whereas typically establishing an evidential claim requires empirical investigation
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1086/392818
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index
Download options
PhilPapers Archive

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 24,422
External links
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.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles
Peter Achinstein (1994). Stronger Evidence. Philosophy of Science 61 (3):329-350.
David Hull (1992). Testing Philosophical Claims About Science. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1992:468 - 475.
Richard G. Swinburne (1971). Probability, Credibility and Acceptability. American Philosophical Quarterly 8 (3):275 - 283.
Steven Gimbel (2004). Restoring Ambiguity to Achinstein's Account of Evidence. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 55 (2):269-285.
Peter Achinstein (1995). Are Empirical Evidence Claims a Priori? British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 46 (4):447-473.
William P. Bechtel (forthcoming). The Epistemology of Evidence in Cognitive Neuroscience. In R. Skipper Jr, C. Allen, R. A. Ankeny, C. F. Craver, L. Darden, G. Mikkelson & and R. Richardson (eds.), Philosophy and the Life Sciences: A Reader. MIT Press.

Monthly downloads

Added to index


Total downloads

160 ( #26,484 of 1,924,955 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

16 ( #40,129 of 1,924,955 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature

Start a new thread
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.