Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Analogical arguments are often applied to novel hypothese... — Carmelics
    Home/Modality & Possibility
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Analogical arguments cannot provide Bayesian confirmation of a hypothesis

    Analogical arguments are often applied to novel hypotheses H for which the prior probability Pr(H|K) is not even defined, rendering Bayesian conditionalization inapplicable

    Modality & PossibilityTruth & Knowledge
    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.

    No one has weighed in yet. Be the first to share reasons for or against this statement.

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Topics

    Modality & PossibilityTruth & Knowledge

    Connections

    1 topic

    Philosophy of Language2 linked

    Related

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Browse more in Modality & Possibility
    Related propositions within the same area of thought.
    Analogical arguments cannot provide Bayesian confirmation of a hypothesisBayesian confirmation requires that evidence proposition E raises the conditiona...Even if such a proposition E can be formulated, the information it contains is a...The information contained in an analogical argument typically cannot be encapsul...

    Similar

    Fiducial probability derives a probability assignment over hypotheses ...78%A probabilistic a priori argument would not be defeated by the mere co...78%The Bayes-Laplace argument may constitute a priori reasoning78%A purely a priori argument for inductive inference cannot be found via...77%

    Source

    AI-extracted
    SEP: reasoning-analogy
    View source passageHide passage
    ” A modal extension of this principle runs roughly as follows: if problems might be essentially the same, then they might have essentially the same solution. There are two modalities here. , that the source and target domains ‘might be essentially the same’ in relevant respects. ’ To call a hypothesis prima facie plausible is to elevate it to the point where it merits investigation, since it might be correct. The argument is vulnerable to two sorts of concerns. First, there are questions about

    Details

    Type
    premise
    Perspectives
    0 (0 for, 0 against)
    Edits
    1 edit

    Open for perspectives

    This idea is waiting for its first supporting or challenging perspective.

    Share the first perspective