Hempel's Raven paradox: A lacuna in the standard bayesian solution

British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 55 (3):545-560 (2004)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

According to Hempel's paradox, evidence (E) that an object is a nonblack nonraven confirms the hypothesis (H) that every raven is black. According to the standard Bayesian solution, E does confirm H but only to a minute degree. This solution relies on the almost never explicitly defended assumption that the probability of H should not be affected by evidence that an object is nonblack. I argue that this assumption is implausible, and I propose a way out for Bayesians. Introduction Hempel's paradox, the standard Bayesian solution, and the disputed assumption Attempts to defend the disputed assumption Attempts to refute the disputed assumption A way out for Bayesians Conclusion.

Similar books and articles

Regarding the Raven Paradox.Robert J. Levy - 1988 - PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1988:17 - 23.
The paradox of confirmation.Branden Fitelson - 2006 - Philosophy Compass 1 (1):95–113.
The bayesian treatment of auxiliary hypotheses.Michael Strevens - 2001 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 52 (3):515-537.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
1,265 (#9,099)

6 months
257 (#8,906)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Peter Vranas
University of Wisconsin, Madison

References found in this work

Fact, Fiction, and Forecast.Nelson Goodman - 1965 - Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
Laws and symmetry.Bas C. van Fraassen - 1989 - New York: Oxford University Press.
Inference to the Best Explanation.Peter Lipton - 1991 - London and New York: Routledge/Taylor and Francis Group.
Scientific reasoning: the Bayesian approach.Peter Urbach & Colin Howson - 1993 - Chicago: Open Court. Edited by Peter Urbach.

View all 125 references / Add more references