当前位置: X-MOL 学术European Journal for Philosophy of Science › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
The old evidence problem and the inference to the best explanation
European Journal for Philosophy of Science ( IF 1.5 ) Pub Date : 2023-01-05 , DOI: 10.1007/s13194-022-00507-4
Cristina Sagrafena

The Problem of Old Evidence (POE) states that Bayesian confirmation theory cannot explain why a theory H can be confirmed by a piece of evidence E already known. Different dimensions of POE have been highlighted. Here, I consider the dynamic and static dimension. In the former, we want to explain how the discovery that H accounts for E confirms H. In the latter, we want to understand why E is and will be a reason to prefer H over its competitors. The aim of the paper is twofold. Firstly, I stress that two recent solutions to the dynamic dimension, recently proposed by Eva and Hartmann, can be read in terms of Inference to the Best Explanation (IBE). On this base, I gauge the weaknesses and strengths of the two models. Namely, I show that the two authors endorse a particular IBE’s formulation, and that it is still unsure if it is the one descriptively used. Moreover, I contend that, while one condition of their first model is not expression of this formulation, the only condition of their second model is. Secondly, I focus on the static dimension of POE which, now, has to be expressed in IBE terms. To solve it, I rely on the counterfactual approach, and on a version of IBE in which explanatory considerations help to evaluate the terms in Bayes’ theorem. However, it turns out that the problems of the counterfactual approach recur even when it is used to solve the static POE in IBE terms.



中文翻译:

旧证据问题与最佳解释推理

旧证据问题 (POE) 指出,贝叶斯确证理论无法解释为什么理论 H 可以被已知证据 E 证实。突出了 POE 的不同维度。在这里,我考虑动态和静态维度。在前者中,我们想解释 H 解释 E 的发现是如何证实 H 的。在后者中,我们想了解为什么 E 是并且将成为更喜欢 H 而不是其竞争对手的原因。本文的目的是双重的。首先,我强调最近由 Eva 和 Hartmann 提出的动态维度的两个解决方案可以从最佳解释推理 (IBE) 的角度来解读。在此基础上,我评估了两种模型的弱点和优势。即,我表明两位作者认可 IBE 的特定表述,并且它仍然不确定它是否是描述性使用的那个。此外,我认为,虽然他们的第一个模型的一个条件不是这个公式的表达,但他们的第二个模型的唯一条件是。其次,我关注 POE 的静态维度,现在必须用 IBE 术语来表达。为了解决这个问题,我依赖于反事实方法,以及 IBE 的一个版本,其中解释性考虑有助于评估贝叶斯定理中的术语。然而,事实证明,即使将反事实方法用于解决 IBE 术语中的静态 POE,其问题也会反复出现。为了解决这个问题,我依赖于反事实方法,以及 IBE 的一个版本,其中解释性考虑有助于评估贝叶斯定理中的术语。然而,事实证明,即使将反事实方法用于解决 IBE 术语中的静态 POE,其问题也会反复出现。为了解决这个问题,我依赖于反事实方法,以及 IBE 的一个版本,其中解释性考虑有助于评估贝叶斯定理中的术语。然而,事实证明,即使将反事实方法用于解决 IBE 术语中的静态 POE,其问题也会反复出现。

更新日期:2023-01-06
down
wechat
bug