Affiliation:
1. Oxford University , UK
2. Yale University , US
Abstract
Abstract
This paper is a response to “Inferential Evidence” by Jeffrey Dunn, in which he argues that my account of evidence is internally inconsistent, and that any form of Bayesian epistemology excludes evidence gained by inductive inference (which my account allows). In response, I show how the alleged inconsistency dissolves once the process of gaining evidence by inductive inference is fully articulated into the relevant stages, with due attention to the potential role of recognitional capacities.
Publisher
Oxford University Press (OUP)
Reference6 articles.
1. “In Defense of the A Priori,”;Bonjour,2013
2. “Inferential Evidence,”;Dunn;American Philosophical Quarterly,2014
3. “How Probable Is an Infinite Sequence of Heads?”;Analysis,2007