TITLE

Empirical evidence claims are a priori

AUTHOR(S)
Rowbottom, Darrell P.
PUB. DATE
September 2013
SOURCE
Synthese;Sep2013, Vol. 190 Issue 13, p2821
SOURCE TYPE
Academic Journal
DOC. TYPE
Article
ABSTRACT
This paper responds to Achinstein’s criticism of the thesis that the only empirical fact that can affect the truth of an objective evidence claim such as ‘e is evidence for h’ (or ‘e confirms h to degree r’) is the truth of e. It shows that cases involving evidential flaws, which form the basis for Achinstein’s objections to the thesis, can satisfactorily be accounted for by appeal to changes in background information and working assumptions. The paper also argues that the a priori and empirical accounts of evidence are on a par when we consider scientific practice, but that a study of artificial intelligence might serve to differentiate them.
ACCESSION #
91988914

 

Related Articles

  • Peter Achinstein: Evidence, Explanation, and Realism: Essays in Philosophy of Science. Douven, Igor // Science & Education;Apr2012, Vol. 21 Issue 4, p597 

    The article reviews the book "Evidence, Explanation, and Realism: Essays in Philosophy of Science," by Peter Achinstein.

  • Are empirical evidence claims a priori? Achinstein, Peter // British Journal for the Philosophy of Science;Dec95, Vol. 46 Issue 4, p447 

    Challenges the claim that an a priori thesis about evidence states that the only empirical fact that can affect the truth of an objective evidence claim of the form `e is evidence for h' is the truth for e. Defense of an empirical concept of evidence; Extent to which e confirms h is an...

  • POPPER'S FALSIFIABILITY AND MISES'S A-PRIORISM: IS DOGMATISM EVERYWHERE? Warin, Thierry // Epistemologia;2005, Vol. 28 Issue 1, p121 

    This article discusses the application of falsifiability and a-priorism in the characterization of the scientific method. According to the concept of falsification, no amount of empirical evidence restricted to claims about particulars can verify or justify a theory, but a single piece of...

  • Edited Volumes.  // History & Philosophy of the Life Sciences;2006, Vol. 28 Issue 1, p129 

    The article presents a list of edited books including "Historia: Empricism and Erudition in Early Modern Europe," by Gianna Pomata and Nancy G. Siraisi, "Scientific Evidence: Philosophical Theories & Applications," edited by Peter Achinstein, "The Identities of History in Early Modern Europe:...

  • The Book of Evidence (Book). Hudson, Robert G. // Dialogue: Canadian Philosophical Review;Winter2004, Vol. 43 Issue 1, p184 

    Reviews the book "The Book of Evidence," by Peter Achinstein.

  • In Defense of Positive Relevance: A Reply to Peter Achinstein. Kenna, Aaron // Florida Philosophical Review;Summer2011, Vol. 11 Issue 1, p26 

    The author offers a response to the article "Four Mistaken Theses About Evidence and How to Correct Them," by Peter Achinstein. He claims that Achinstein's account of evidence is problematic. He says that Achinstein imposes a discontinuous structure upon a continuous concept resulting in his...

  • Probability and subjective evidence condition. Miller, Steven I.; Fredericks, Marcel // Quality & Quantity;Nov94, Vol. 28 Issue 4, p411 

    This article is an attempt to clarify and possibly extend Achinstein's idea of subjective evidence. The argument is made that even though the idea of subjective evidence is ambiguous m many respects, if clarified, it holds potentially important consequences for various branches of knowledge. An...

  • DESCRIPTIVE VS REVISIONARY SOCIAL EPISTEMOLOGY: THE FORMER AS SEEN BY THE LATTER. Fuller, Steve // Episteme (Edinburgh University Press);Jun2004, Vol. 1 Issue 1, p23 

    Examines the dominant descriptive approach to metaphysics from a revisionary standpoint. Revisionary history of the descriptive philosophical attitude; List of argumenta in their canonical Latin guises and explication that brings out their latent social scientific content; Implications of...

  • Thinking about Achinstein’s philosophy of science: Gregory J. Morgan (ed.): Philosophy of science matters: The philosophy of Peter Achinstein. Oxford and New York: Oxford University Press, 2011, 300pp, $39.95 HB. Newman, Mark // Metascience;Nov2013, Vol. 22 Issue 3, p641 

    The article reviews the book "Philosophy of Science Matters: The Philosophy of Peter Achinstein" edited by Gregory J. Morgan.

Share

Read the Article

Courtesy of VIRGINIA BEACH PUBLIC LIBRARY AND SYSTEM

Sorry, but this item is not currently available from your library.

Try another library?
Sign out of this library

Other Topics