• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Studies in History and Philosophy of Science. A >Normativity, the base-rate fallacy, and some problems for retail realism
【24h】

Normativity, the base-rate fallacy, and some problems for retail realism

机译：规范性，基准利率谬误以及零售现实主义的一些问题

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

Recent literature in the scientific realism debate has been concerned with a particular species of statistical fallacy concerning base-rates, and the worry that no matter how predictively successful our contemporary scientific theories may be, this will tell us absolutely nothing about the likelihood of their truth if our overall sample space contains enough empirically adequate theories that are nevertheless false. In response, both realists and anti-realists have switched their focus from general arguments concerning the reliability and historical track-records of our scientific methodology, to a series of specific arguments and case-studies concerning our reasons to believe individual scientific theories to be true. Such a development however sits in tension with the usual understanding of the scientific realism debate as offering a second-order assessment of our first-order scientific practices, and threatens to undermine the possibility of a distinctive philosophical debate over the approximate truth of our scientific theories. I illustrate this concern with three recent attempts to offer a more localised understanding of the scientific realism debate-due to Stathis Psillos, Juha Saatsi, and Kyle Stanford-and argue that none of these alternatives offer a satisfactory response to the problem.
机译：科学现实主义辩论中的最新文献关注的是与基准利率有关的特定统计谬误，并且担心无论我们的现代科学理论在预测上多么成功，这绝对不会告诉我们它们真实性的可能性。如果我们的整体样本空间包含足够的经验上足够的理论，但这些理论都是错误的。作为回应，现实主义者和反现实主义者都将他们的注意力从关于我们科学方法论的可靠性和历史记录的一般论点转移到关于我们认为个别科学理论是正确的原因的一系列具体论点和案例研究。 。然而，这样的发展与对科学现实主义辩论的通常理解之间存在着紧张关系，因为它为我们的一阶科学实践提供了二阶评估，并威胁着破坏关于我们的科学理论的近似真相进行独特的哲学辩论的可能性。 。我通过Stathis Psillos，Juha Saatsi和Kyle Stanford的三项最近尝试来提供对科学现实主义辩论的更本地化理解，来说明这种担忧，并认为这些选择都不能对这一问题提供令人满意的回应。

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