Confirmation and adequacy conditions

Philosophy of Science 38 (3):361-368 (1971)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Several standard conditions of adequacy for confirmation are considered and a conclusion of B. Skyrms regarding the converse-consequence condition is shown to be mistaken. Widely accepted conditions such as the entailment condition and the special consequence condition are shown to be open to counterexample, and confusion about these conditions is traced to confusion about the difference between two kinds of confirmation concepts--concepts of firmness and concepts of increase in firmness. The importance of concepts of the latter sort is stressed. Finally, some suggestions are offered relating to the notion of selective confirmation

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 92,471

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
32 (#504,058)

6 months
14 (#188,120)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

A weaker condition for transitivity in probabilistic support.William A. Roche - 2012 - European Journal for Philosophy of Science 2 (1):111-118.
On the Truth-Conduciveness of Coherence.William Roche - 2014 - Erkenntnis 79 (S3):647-665.
Confirmation, paradoxes, and possible worlds.Shelley Stillwell - 1985 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 36 (1):19-52.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Fact, Fiction, and Forecast.Nelson Goodman - 1955 - Philosophy 31 (118):268-269.
Theories and the transitivity of confirmation.Mary Hesse - 1970 - Philosophy of Science 37 (1):50-63.
Nomological necessity and the paradoxes of confirmation.Brian Skyrms - 1966 - Philosophy of Science 33 (3):230-249.

View all 12 references / Add more references