期刊文献+

对“老证据问题”的解决——从语境论的角度看 被引量:3

Solutions to “the Old Evidence Problem”: From the Perspective of Contextualism
原文传递
导出
摘要 对于"老证据问题",豪森和厄巴赫提出一个基于贝叶斯方法的解决方案。该方案实际上借助于一个"检验语境的原则"即:新证据相对于当前背景,老证据相对于老背景,而且老背景相当于当前背景减去老证据。笔者的方案接受了该方案的贝叶斯方法和语境主义的立场,但对老背景的内容作了修正,即由"当前背景减去老证据"改为"由当前背景减去旧理论"。相比之下,笔者的方案更为符合科学史实,同时印证了库恩的范式理论。 For the old evidence problem, Howson and Urbach propose a solution based on the Bayesian approach. Their solution appeals actually to the principle of testing context, i.e., the new evidence is relative to the present background, while the old evidence is relative to the old background. Besides, the old background amounts to the present background minus the old evidence. The solution proposed in this paper adopts the standpoint of Bayesian approach and contextualism, but makes some modifications about the content of the old background. It manages to replace 'the present background minus the old evidence' with 'the present background minus the old theory'. The author's solution matches historical facts of science better, and confirms Kuhn's theory of paradigm to a great extent.
出处 《自然辩证法通讯》 CSSCI 北大核心 2014年第2期25-29,125,共5页 Journal of Dialectics of Nature
基金 国家社科基金项目(10BZX020) 广东省社会科学规划项目(09C-01) 广东省高校人文社科基地重大项目(10JDXM72001) 中国逻辑学会学术研究重点项目(13CLZD001)
关键词 老证据问题 贝叶斯方法 认证 语境 The old evidence problem The Bayesian approach Confi rmation Context
  • 相关文献

参考文献5

  • 1Glymour, C., Theory and Evidence [M]. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1980, 86.
  • 2Howson, C., Urbach, P., Scientific Reasoning: The Bayesian Approach [M]. Third Edition, Chicago: Open Court Publishing Company, 2006, 298-301.
  • 3Howson, C., Urbach, P., Scientific Reasoning: The Bayesian Approach [M]. Second Edition, Chicago: Open Court Publishing Company, 1993, 405-406.
  • 4陈晓平.摹状词指称的存在性和语境[J].自然辩证法研究,2011,27(7):1-6. 被引量:6
  • 5托马斯·库恩 著 金吾伦 译.科学革命的结构[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2003..

二级参考文献7

  • 1罗素.摹状词[C]//马蒂尼奇.语言哲学[M].牟博等,译.北京:商务印书馆,1998:400-413.
  • 2Miller A. Philosophy of Language[M]. London: UCL Press, 1998.
  • 3Devitt M & Sterelny K. Language and Reallty: An Intro- duction to the Philosophy of Language[M]. Oxford: Black- well Publishers, 1999.
  • 4Sullivan A. Logicism and the Philosophy of Language: Selections from Frege and Russell[M]. Peterborough, Ont. : Broadview Press, 2003.
  • 5唐奈兰.指称与限定摹状词[C]//马蒂尼奇.语言哲学[M].牟博等,译.北京:商务印书馆,1998;447-474.
  • 6罗素.我的哲学的发展[M].北京:商务印书馆,1982..
  • 7陈晓平,赵亮英.斯特劳森与罗素的指称理论之比较[J].华南师范大学学报(社会科学版),2009(6):78-83. 被引量:7

共引文献345

同被引文献10

  • 1Huber F. Subjective Probabilities as Basis for Scientific Reasoning? [J]. The British Journal for the philosophy of science ,2005,56 ( 1 ) : 101 - 116.
  • 2Musgrave A. Popper and "Diminishing Returns from Re- peated Tests" [ J ]. Australasian Journal of philosophy, 1975 ( 53 ) :248 - 253.
  • 3Howson C, Urbach P. Scientific Reasoning [ M ]. Chicago: Open Court, 1992 : 120 - 123.
  • 4亨普尔.自然科学的哲学[M].张华夏,译.上海:三联书店.1987:66.
  • 5Talbott W. Bayesian Epistemology-The Stanford Encyclo- pedia of Philosophy (Fall 2013 Edition ) [ DB/OL ]. [2013 - 11 - 12 ]. http ://plato. stanford, edu/archives/ fall2013/entries/epistemology-bayesian/.
  • 6Howson and P. Urbaeh. Scientific Reasoning. Chicago: Open Court Pub- lishing Company, 1993.
  • 7陈晓平.意见收敛定理与休谟问题[J].现代哲学,2008(5):67-74. 被引量:4
  • 8C.豪森,胡浩.定律的逻辑概率一定为0吗?[J].世界哲学,2012(2):99-105. 被引量:1
  • 9黎红勤.关于旧证据问题的争论——评豪森的反事实策略[J].重庆理工大学学报(社会科学),2014,28(3):26-31. 被引量:1
  • 10刘治,张端明.贝尔不等式及其实验验证[J].湖北大学学报(自然科学版),2002,24(2):131-135. 被引量:5

引证文献3

二级引证文献1

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部