Journal
BRITISH JOURNAL FOR THE PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE
Volume 71, Issue 1, Pages 321-352Publisher
OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/bjps/axy005
Keywords
-
Categories
Funding
- Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) [SI 1731/1-1]
- [SPP 1516]
Ask authors/readers for more resources
Tacking by conjunction is a deep problem for Bayesian confirmation theory. It is based on the insight that to each hypothesis h that is confirmed by a piece of evidence e one can 'tack' an irrelevant hypothesis h' so that h boolean AND h' is also confirmed by e. This seems counter-intuitive. Existing Bayesian solution proposals try to soften the negative impact of this result by showing that although h boolean AND h' is confirmed by e, it is so only to a lower degree. In this article we outline some problems of these proposals and develop an alternative solution based on a new concept of confirmation that we call genuine confirmation. After pointing out that genuine confirmation is a necessary condition for cumulative confirmation we apply this notion to the tacking by conjunction problem. We consider both the question of what happens when irrelevant hypotheses are added to a hypothesis h that is confirmed by e as well as the question of what happens when h is disconfirmed. The upshot of our discussion will be that genuine confirmation provides a robust solution for each of the different perspectives.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available