Empirical evidence claims are a priori.

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 ‘ is evidence for ’ (or ‘ confirms to degree ’) is the truth of . It shows that cases involving evidential flaws, which form the basis for Achins...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Synthese Vol. 190; no. 13; pp. 2821 - 2835
Autor principal: Rowbottom, Darrell P.
Formato: Artículo
Publicado: Springer Nature Sep2013
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=91988914&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: hlh
    uiTerm: 91988914
    longDbName: Humanities International Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        00397857
        4LI
      jtl: Synthese
      issn: 00397857
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: Sep2013
      vid: 190
      iid: 13
      pid: 237
      pub: Springer Nature
    artinfo:
      ui:
        91988914
        10.1007/s11229-012-0087-x
      ppf: 2821
      ppct: 14
      formats:
        fmt:
          @attributes:
            type: P
            size: 171KB
      tig:
        atl: Empirical evidence claims are a priori.
      aug:
        au: Rowbottom, Darrell P.
        affil: Department of Philosophy, Lingnan University, 8 Castle Peak Road, Tuen Mun, N.T., Hong Kong
      su:
        Evidence
        Achinstein, Peter
        A priori
        Empiricism
        Philosophy of science
        Social epistemology
        Machine learning
      sug:
        subj:
          Evidence
          Achinstein, Peter
          A priori
          Empiricism
          Philosophy of science
          Social epistemology
          Machine learning
      keyword:
        A priori thesis
        Achinstein
        Confirmation
        Working assumptions
      ab: 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 ‘ is evidence for ’ (or ‘ confirms to degree ’) is the truth of . 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.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype: Article
      src: R
    language: English
    refInfo:
    copyright:
      @attributes:
        flag: Y
      custom: Synthese is a copyright of Springer, 2013. All Rights Reserved.
      item: Synthese
      holder: Springer Nature
      dt:
        @attributes:
          year: 2013
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N