How explanation guides confirmation

Journal article

Climenhaga, Nevin. (2017). How explanation guides confirmation. Philosophy of Science: official journal of the Philosophy of Science Association. 84(2), pp. 359 - 368. https://doi.org/10.1086/690723
AuthorsClimenhaga, Nevin
Abstract

Where E is the proposition that [If H and O were true, H would explain O], William Roche and Elliot Sober have argued that P(H | O&E) = P(H | O). In this article I argue that not only is this equality not generally true, it is false in the very kinds of cases that Roche and Sober focus on, involving frequency data. In fact, in such cases O raises the probability of H only given that there is an explanatory connection between them.

Year2017
JournalPhilosophy of Science: official journal of the Philosophy of Science Association
Journal citation84 (2), pp. 359 - 368
PublisherUniversity of Chicago Press
ISSN0031-8248
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)https://doi.org/10.1086/690723
Scopus EID2-s2.0-85015221728
Page range359 - 368
Research GroupDianoia Institute of Philosophy
Publisher's version
File Access Level
Controlled
Place of publicationUnited States of America
Permalink -

https://acuresearchbank.acu.edu.au/item/89z72/how-explanation-guides-confirmation

Log in to edit

Restricted files

Publisher's version

  • 105
    total views
  • 0
    total downloads
  • 1
    views this month
  • 0
    downloads this month
These values are for the period from 19th October 2020, when this repository was created.

Export as

Related outputs

Images of Mercy : Narrating the Gospel through a Rwandan Catholic Shrine
Climenhaga, Alison Marie Fitchett and Climenhaga, Nevin. (2024). Images of Mercy : Narrating the Gospel through a Rwandan Catholic Shrine. In In Stump, Eleonore and Wolfe, Judith (Ed.). Biblical Narratives and Human Flourishing: Knowledge Through Narrative pp. 199 Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003422587-16
Evidence and Inductive Inference
Climenhaga, Nevin. (2024). Evidence and Inductive Inference. In In Lasonen-Aarnio, Maria and Littlejohn, Clayton (Ed.). The Routledge Handbook of the Philosophy of Evidence pp. 435-449 Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315672687-39
How infallibilists can have it all
Climenhaga, Nevin. (2023). How infallibilists can have it all. Monist: an international quarterly of general philosophical inquiry. 106(4), pp. 363-380. https://doi.org/10.1093/monist/onad020
Epistemic probabilities are degrees of support, not degrees of (rational) belief
Climenhaga, Nevin. (2023). Epistemic probabilities are degrees of support, not degrees of (rational) belief. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research. pp. 1-24. https://doi.org/10.1111/phpr.12947
Molinism : Explaining our freedom away
Climenhaga, Nevin and Rubio, Daniel. (2022). Molinism : Explaining our freedom away. Mind. 131(522), pp. 459-485. https://doi.org/10.1093/mind/fzab042
A cumulative case argument for infallibilism
Climenhaga, Nevin. (2021). A cumulative case argument for infallibilism. In In Kyriacou, Christos and Wallbridge, Kevin (Ed.). Skeptical invariantism reconsidered pp. 57-79 Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429353468-6
Causal inference from noise
Climenhaga, Nevin, DesAutels, Lane and Ramsey, Grant. (2021). Causal inference from noise. Noûs. 55(1), pp. 152-170. https://doi.org/10.1111/nous.12300
The structure of epistemic probabilities
Climenhaga, Nevin. (2020). The structure of epistemic probabilities. Philosophical Studies. 177(11), pp. 3213-3242. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-019-01367-0
Papias's prologue and the probability of parallels
Climenhaga, Nevin. (2020). Papias's prologue and the probability of parallels. Journal of Biblical Literature. 139(3), pp. 591-596. https://doi.org/10.15699/jbl.1393.2020.8
Can we know God? New insights from religious epistemology
Climenhaga, Nevin. (2019). Can we know God? New insights from religious epistemology United States of America: John Templeton Foundation.
Infinite value and the best of all possible worlds
Climenhaga, Nevin. (2018). Infinite value and the best of all possible worlds. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research. 97(2), pp. 367 - 392. https://doi.org/10.1111/phpr.12383
Intuitions are used as evidence in philosophy
Climenhaga, Nevin. (2018). Intuitions are used as evidence in philosophy. Mind: A Quarterly review of philosophy. 127(505), pp. 69 - 104. https://doi.org/10.1093/mind/fzw032
Inference to the best explanation made incoherent
Climenhaga, Nevin. (2017). Inference to the best explanation made incoherent. Journal of Philosophy. 114(5), pp. 251 - 273. https://doi.org/10.5840/jphil2017114519