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
    Popper and Miller (1983) demonstrated that probabilistic ... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→The Bayesian account of evidential support extends the hypothetical-deductive approach to cover cases where a hypothesis does not deductively entail or preclude an evidential outcome, but instead assigns a probability to that outcome

    Popper and Miller (1983) demonstrated that probabilistic support cannot decompose into genuinely independent inductive increments, undermining the claim that Bayesian updating constitutes a principled generalization of deductive confirmation.

    ?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.

    Key Terms

    Bayesian updating(in probability and epistemology)
    A mathematical method for revising how confident you are in a belief when you receive new evidence, named after an 18th-century mathematician named Bayes.
    Decompose(in logical analysis)
    To break something down into smaller, separate pieces or components.
    Deductive confirmation(in the philosophy of science)
    Proof that something is definitely true because it logically follows from established facts, with no room for doubt.
    Inductive increments(in the philosophy of science)
    Small individual pieces of evidence that each make a theory slightly more believable, added one after another.
    Miller(as a philosopher of science)

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Explore a random proposition
    Start fresh with something unrelated.
    David Miller is a philosopher who collaborated with Popper on problems about how evidence supports scientific theories.
    Popper
    # Popper Karl Popper was a highly influential 20th-century philosopher who changed how we think about science and knowledge. He argued that the best way to test scientific ideas is to try to prove them *wrong* rather than prove them right—if something can't be proven false, it's not really science. His ideas shaped modern scientific practice and remain central to how scientists evaluate theories today.
    Principled generalization(in logical reasoning)
    A systematic, rule-based way of extending an idea from one area to another, rather than doing it arbitrarily.
    probabilistic support(Turing Test interpretations)
    Evidence that raises the likelihood of intelligence attribution without constituting a logical guarantee

    Connections

    2 topics

    Truth & Knowledge1 linkedSkepticism1 linked

    Related

    The Bayesian account of evidential support extends the hypothetical-deductive ap...

    Details

    Type
    claim
    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