Cargando…

The probabilistic no miracles argument

This paper develops a probabilistic reconstruction of the No Miracles Argument (NMA) in the debate between scientific realists and anti-realists. The goal of the paper is to clarify and to sharpen the NMA by means of a probabilistic formalization. In particular, I demonstrate that the persuasive for...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Sprenger, Jan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Netherlands 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4959126/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27512523
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13194-015-0122-0
_version_ 1782444368277274624
author Sprenger, Jan
author_facet Sprenger, Jan
author_sort Sprenger, Jan
collection PubMed
description This paper develops a probabilistic reconstruction of the No Miracles Argument (NMA) in the debate between scientific realists and anti-realists. The goal of the paper is to clarify and to sharpen the NMA by means of a probabilistic formalization. In particular, I demonstrate that the persuasive force of the NMA depends on the particular disciplinary context where it is applied, and the stability of theories in that discipline. Assessments and critiques of “the” NMA, without reference to a particular context, are misleading and should be relinquished. This result has repercussions for recent anti-realist arguments, such as the claim that the NMA commits the base rate fallacy (Howson (2000), Magnus and Callender (Philosophy of Science, 71:320–338, 2004)). It also helps to explain the persistent disagreement between realists and anti-realists.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4959126
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher Springer Netherlands
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-49591262016-08-08 The probabilistic no miracles argument Sprenger, Jan Eur J Philos Sci Original paper in Formal Epistemology This paper develops a probabilistic reconstruction of the No Miracles Argument (NMA) in the debate between scientific realists and anti-realists. The goal of the paper is to clarify and to sharpen the NMA by means of a probabilistic formalization. In particular, I demonstrate that the persuasive force of the NMA depends on the particular disciplinary context where it is applied, and the stability of theories in that discipline. Assessments and critiques of “the” NMA, without reference to a particular context, are misleading and should be relinquished. This result has repercussions for recent anti-realist arguments, such as the claim that the NMA commits the base rate fallacy (Howson (2000), Magnus and Callender (Philosophy of Science, 71:320–338, 2004)). It also helps to explain the persistent disagreement between realists and anti-realists. Springer Netherlands 2015-10-05 2016 /pmc/articles/PMC4959126/ /pubmed/27512523 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13194-015-0122-0 Text en © The Author(s) 2015 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Original paper in Formal Epistemology
Sprenger, Jan
The probabilistic no miracles argument
title The probabilistic no miracles argument
title_full The probabilistic no miracles argument
title_fullStr The probabilistic no miracles argument
title_full_unstemmed The probabilistic no miracles argument
title_short The probabilistic no miracles argument
title_sort probabilistic no miracles argument
topic Original paper in Formal Epistemology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4959126/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27512523
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s13194-015-0122-0
work_keys_str_mv AT sprengerjan theprobabilisticnomiraclesargument
AT sprengerjan probabilisticnomiraclesargument