The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science Advance Access published online on August 10, 2005
The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, doi:10.1093/bjps/axi131
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1 Department of Philosophy, Southern Methodist University, Dallas, TX 75275-0142, USA
* To whom correspondence should be addressed. Predictivism asserts that novel confirmations carry special probative weight. Epistemic pluralism asserts that the judgments of agents (about, e.g., the probabilities of theories) carry epistemic import. In this paper, I propose a new theory of predictivism that is tailored to pluralistic evaluators of theories. I replace the orthodox notion of use-novelty with a notion of endorsement-novelty, and argue that the intuition that predictivism is true has two roots. I provide a detailed Bayesian rendering of this theory and argue that pluralistic theory evaluation pervades scientific practice. I compare my account of predictivism with those of Maher and Worrall. 1 Introduction 2 Why construction is a red herring for pluralist evaluators 3 The unvirtuous accommodator 4 Virtuous endorsers and the two roots of predictivism 5 The two roots in Bayesian terms: the priors and background beliefs of endorsers 6 Who are the pluralist evaluators? 7 Two contemporary theories of predictivism 7.1 Maher: Reliable methods of theory construction 7.2 Worrall: The confirmation of core ideas 8 Conclusion
Article
Predictivism for Pluralists
Eric Christian Barnes, E-mail: ebarnes{at}mail.smu.edu
![]()
Abstract ![]()
CiteULike
Connotea
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
D. Harker On the Predilections for Predictions Brit J Philos Sci, September 1, 2008; 59(3): 429 - 453. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
