• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>International Studies in the Philosophy of Science >Default Privilege and Bad Lots: Underconsideration and Explanatory Inference
【24h】

Default Privilege and Bad Lots: Underconsideration and Explanatory Inference

机译：默认特权和坏货：考虑不足和解释性推断

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

The underconsideration argument against inference to the best explanation and scientific realism holds that scientists are not warranted in inferring that the best theory is true, because scientists only ever conceive of a small handful of theories at one time, and as a result, they may not have considered a true theory. However, antirealists have not developed a detailed alternative account of why explanatory inference nevertheless appears so central to scientific practice. In this paper, I provide new defences against some recent objections to the underconsideration argument, while also developing an account of explanatory inference that both survives these criticisms and does not entail realism.View full textDownload full textRelated var addthis_config = { ui_cobrand: "Taylor & Francis Online", services_compact: "citeulike,netvibes,twitter,technorati,delicious,linkedin,facebook,stumbleupon,digg,google,more", pubid: "ra-4dff56cd6bb1830b" }; Add to shortlist Link Permalink http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02698590903467135
机译：考虑不足以推论最佳解释和科学现实主义的论点认为，没有必要推论科学家认为最佳理论是正确的，因为科学家一次只能构想一小撮理论，结果他们可能不会已经考虑了一个真正的理论。但是，反现实主义者尚未就为什么解释性推理仍然在科学实践中如此重要的问题提出详尽的替代性说明。在本文中，我提供了新的辩护以抵制近期对欠考虑问题的反对意见，同时还提出了一种解释性推论，该解释性推论在这些批评中都可以幸免，并且不需要现实主义。查看全文下载全文相关的var addthis_config = {ui_cobrand：“ Taylor＆弗朗西斯在线”，services_compact：“ citeulike，netvibes，twitter，technorati，美味，linkedin，facebook，stumbleupon，digg，google，更多”，发布号：“ ra-4dff56cd6bb1830b”};添加到候选列表链接永久链接http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02698590903467135

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号