Goodman, 'grue' and Hempel

Philosophy of Science 35 (3):232-247 (1968)
Abstract
It is now commonly accepted that N. Goodman's predicate "grue" presents the theory of confirmation of C. G. Hempel (and other such theories) with grave difficulties. The precise nature and status of these "difficulties" has, however, never been made clear. In this paper it is argued that it is very unlikely that "grue" raises any formal difficulties for Hempel and appearances to the contrary are examined, rejected and an explanation of their intuitive appeal offered. However "grue" is shown to raise an informal, "over-arching" difficulty of great magnitude for all theories of confirmation, including Hempel's theory
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1086/288211
Options
 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
Our Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 28,829
Through your library
References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA
Goodman's "New Riddle".Branden Fitelson - 2008 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 37 (6):613 - 643.
Anything Confirms Anything?Herbert E. Hendry & James E. Roper - 1980 - Synthese 45 (2):217 - 232.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Monthly downloads

Added to index

2009-01-28

Total downloads

25 ( #205,509 of 2,178,245 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

1 ( #316,504 of 2,178,245 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature


Discussion
Order:
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.

Other forums