A Defense of Low-Probability Scientific Explanations.
I evaluate the plausibility of explanatory elitism, the view that a good scientific explanation of an outcome will show that it was highly probable. I consider an argument from Michael Strevens that elitism is the only view that can account for the historical acceptance of probabilistic theories in...
| Publicado en: | Philosophy of Science Vol. 87; no. 1; pp. 91 - 113 |
|---|---|
| Autor principal: | |
| Formato: | Artículo |
| Publicado: |
Cambridge University Press
Jan2020
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=141433197&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: hlh uiTerm: 141433197 longDbName: Humanities International Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: jinfo: jid: 00318248 PSC jtl: Philosophy of Science issn: 00318248 maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: Jan2020 vid: 87 iid: 1 pid: 15979 pub: Cambridge University Press artinfo: ui: 141433197 10.1086/706082 ppf: 91 ppct: 22 formats: fmt: – @attributes: type: T – @attributes: type: P size: 526KB tig: atl: A Defense of Low-Probability Scientific Explanations. aug: au: Clatterbuck, Hayley su: Elitism Explanation Probability theory Virtue Argument Probabilistic number theory sug: subj: Elitism Explanation Probability theory Virtue Argument Probabilistic number theory ab: I evaluate the plausibility of explanatory elitism, the view that a good scientific explanation of an outcome will show that it was highly probable. I consider an argument from Michael Strevens that elitism is the only view that can account for the historical acceptance of probabilistic theories in physics. I argue that biology provides better test cases for evaluating elitism and conclude that theories in that domain were favored in virtue of conferring correct, and not necessarily high, probabilities on outcomes. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Article src: R language: English refInfo: copyright: @attributes: flag: Y custom: Copyright of Philosophy of Science is the property of Cambridge University Press and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. item: Philosophy of Science holder: Cambridge University Press dt: @attributes: year: 2020 holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|