Abstract
AbstractTacking by conjunction is a well-known problem for Bayesian confirmation theory. In the first section, disadvantages of existing Bayesian solution proposals to this problem are pointed out and an alternative solution proposal is presented: that of genuine confirmation (GC). In the second section, the notion of GC is briefly recapitulated and three versions of GC are distinguished: full (qualitative) GC, partial (qualitative) GC and quantitative GC. In the third section, the application of partial GC to pure post-facto speculations is explained. In the fourth section it is demonstrated that full GC is a necessary condition for Bayesian convergence to certainty based on the accumulation of conditionally independent pieces of evidence. It is found that whenever a hypothesis is equivalent to a disjunction of more fine-grained hypotheses conveying different probabilities to the evidence, then conditional independence of the evidence fails. This failure occurs typically for unspecific negations of hypotheses. A refined version of the convergence to certainty theorem that overcomes this difficulty is developed in the final section.
Funder
Heinrich-Heine-Universität Düsseldorf
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
History and Philosophy of Science,Philosophy
Reference25 articles.
1. Bovens, L., & Hartmann, S. (2003). Bayesian epistemology. Oxford University Press.
2. Crupi, V., & Tentori, K. (2010). Irrelevant conjunction: Statement and solution of a new paradox. Philosophy of Science, 77, 1–13.
3. Earman, J. (1992). Bayes or bust? A critical examination of Bayesian confirmation theory. MIT Press.
4. Fine, K. (2017). A theory of truthmaker content. Journal of Philosophical Logic. Part I: 46: 625–674, Part II: 6: 675–702.
5. Fitelson, B. (2002). Putting the irrelevance back into the problem of irrelevant conjunction. Philosophy of Science, 69, 611–622.
Cited by
2 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献