The inductive significance of observationally indistinguishable spacetimes: (Peter Achinstein has the last laugh)
For several years, through the “material theory of induction,” I have urged that inductive inferences are not licensed by universal schemas, but by material facts that hold only locally (Norton, 2003, 2005). My goal has been to defend inductive inference against inductive skeptics by demonstrating when and how inductive inferences are properly made. Since I have always admired Peter Achinstein as a staunch defender of induction, it was a surprise when Peter..
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Deductively Definable Logies of Induction.John Norton - 2010 - Journal of Philosophical Logic 39 (6):617 - 654.
The Circularity of a Self-Supporting Inductive Argument.Peter Achinstein - 1962 - Analysis 22 (6):138 - 141.
A Material Dissolution of the Problem of Induction.John D. Norton - 2013 - Synthese 191 (4):1-20.
The Inductive Significance of Observationally Indistinguishable Spacetimes.John D. Norton - unknown -
There Are No Universal Rules for Induction.John D. Norton - 2010 - Philosophy of Science 77 (5):765-777.
Added to index2009-05-23
Total downloads73 ( #67,638 of 2,126,920 )
Recent downloads (6 months)5 ( #177,559 of 2,126,920 )
How can I increase my downloads?
There are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.