What's Wrong With Our Theories of Evidence?

Theoria 29 (2):283-306 (2014)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This paper reviews all major theories of evidence such as the Bayesian theory, hypothetico-deductivism, satisfaction theories, error-statistics, Achinstein's explanationist theory and Cartwright's argument theory. All these theories fail to take adequate account of the context in which a hypothesis is established and used. It is argued that the context of an inquiry determines important facts about what evidence is, and how much and what kind has to be collected to establish a hypothesis for a given purpose.

Other Versions

original Reiss, Julian (2014) "What’s Wrong With Our Theories of Evidence?". Theoria: Revista de Teoría, Historia y Fundamentos de la Ciencia 29(2):283-306

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 101,225

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP
2016-02-04

Downloads
93 (#225,942)

6 months
13 (#257,195)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Citations of this work

What are the drivers of induction? Towards a Material Theory+.Julian Reiss - 2020 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 83 (C):8-16.
Political science methodology: A plea for pluralism.Sharon Crasnow - 2019 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 78 (C):40-47.

Add more citations

References found in this work

In Defence of Objective Bayesianism.Jon Williamson - 2010 - Oxford University Press.
Error and the growth of experimental knowledge.Deborah Mayo - 1996 - International Studies in the Philosophy of Science 15 (1):455-459.
A material theory of induction.John D. Norton - 2003 - Philosophy of Science 70 (4):647-670.

View all 16 references / Add more references