Contrastive confirmation: some competing accounts
I outline four competing probabilistic accounts of contrastive evidential support and consider various considerations that might help arbitrate between these. The upshot of the discussion is that the so-called 'Law of Likelihood' is to be preferred to any of the alternatives considered.
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Synthese (Dordrecht) 2013-01, Vol.190 (1), p.129-138 |
|---|---|
| 1. Verfasser: | |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 138 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 1 |
| container_start_page | 129 |
| container_title | Synthese (Dordrecht) |
| container_volume | 190 |
| creator | Chandler, Jake |
| description | I outline four competing probabilistic accounts of contrastive evidential support and consider various considerations that might help arbitrate between these. The upshot of the discussion is that the so-called 'Law of Likelihood' is to be preferred to any of the alternatives considered. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s11229-010-9845-9 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_1266485187</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>23324594</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>23324594</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c338t-8c8918e6b257aa27f3b68439e625675337e4c4fcf6c71c2f53556f7e5ae385a43</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kEtLAzEUhYMoWKs_wIVQcB3Nzc3TnRRfUHCj65CGRKY4k5qkgv_eKSPiytWFy_nOgY-Qc2BXwJi-rgCcW8qAUWuEpPaAzEBqpMwqcUhmjKGl2kh9TE5q3TAGoASbEVjmoRVfW_cZFyEPqSu9b10ebhY19_tXv42tG94WPoS8G1o9JUfJv9d49nPn5PX-7mX5SFfPD0_L2xUNiKZRE4wFE9WaS-091wnXygi0UXGptETUUQSRQlJBQ-BJopQq6Sh9RCO9wDm5nHq3JX_sYm1uk3dlGCcdcKWEkWD0mIIpFUqutcTktqXrfflywNzejJvMuNGM25txdmT4xNQxO7zF8qf5H-higja15fK7whG5kFbgNwVQbqQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1266485187</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Contrastive confirmation: some competing accounts</title><source>SpringerLink Journals</source><source>JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing</source><creator>Chandler, Jake</creator><creatorcontrib>Chandler, Jake</creatorcontrib><description>I outline four competing probabilistic accounts of contrastive evidential support and consider various considerations that might help arbitrate between these. The upshot of the discussion is that the so-called 'Law of Likelihood' is to be preferred to any of the alternatives considered.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0039-7857</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1573-0964</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s11229-010-9845-9</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Dordrecht: Springer</publisher><subject>Bayesian analysis ; Betting ; Conditional probabilities ; Education ; Epistemology ; Evidentiality ; Intuition ; Law of likelihood ; Logic ; Metaphysics ; Model theory ; Pasta ; Philosophy ; Philosophy of Language ; Philosophy of Science ; Pizzas ; Probability distributions</subject><ispartof>Synthese (Dordrecht), 2013-01, Vol.190 (1), p.129-138</ispartof><rights>2013 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht</rights><rights>Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2010</rights><rights>Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2013</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c338t-8c8918e6b257aa27f3b68439e625675337e4c4fcf6c71c2f53556f7e5ae385a43</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c338t-8c8918e6b257aa27f3b68439e625675337e4c4fcf6c71c2f53556f7e5ae385a43</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/23324594$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/23324594$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,803,27924,27925,41488,42557,51319,58017,58250</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Chandler, Jake</creatorcontrib><title>Contrastive confirmation: some competing accounts</title><title>Synthese (Dordrecht)</title><addtitle>Synthese</addtitle><description>I outline four competing probabilistic accounts of contrastive evidential support and consider various considerations that might help arbitrate between these. The upshot of the discussion is that the so-called 'Law of Likelihood' is to be preferred to any of the alternatives considered.</description><subject>Bayesian analysis</subject><subject>Betting</subject><subject>Conditional probabilities</subject><subject>Education</subject><subject>Epistemology</subject><subject>Evidentiality</subject><subject>Intuition</subject><subject>Law of likelihood</subject><subject>Logic</subject><subject>Metaphysics</subject><subject>Model theory</subject><subject>Pasta</subject><subject>Philosophy</subject><subject>Philosophy of Language</subject><subject>Philosophy of Science</subject><subject>Pizzas</subject><subject>Probability distributions</subject><issn>0039-7857</issn><issn>1573-0964</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2013</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>8G5</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AIMQZ</sourceid><sourceid>AVQMV</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>GUQSH</sourceid><sourceid>K50</sourceid><sourceid>M1D</sourceid><sourceid>M2O</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kEtLAzEUhYMoWKs_wIVQcB3Nzc3TnRRfUHCj65CGRKY4k5qkgv_eKSPiytWFy_nOgY-Qc2BXwJi-rgCcW8qAUWuEpPaAzEBqpMwqcUhmjKGl2kh9TE5q3TAGoASbEVjmoRVfW_cZFyEPqSu9b10ebhY19_tXv42tG94WPoS8G1o9JUfJv9d49nPn5PX-7mX5SFfPD0_L2xUNiKZRE4wFE9WaS-091wnXygi0UXGptETUUQSRQlJBQ-BJopQq6Sh9RCO9wDm5nHq3JX_sYm1uk3dlGCcdcKWEkWD0mIIpFUqutcTktqXrfflywNzejJvMuNGM25txdmT4xNQxO7zF8qf5H-higja15fK7whG5kFbgNwVQbqQ</recordid><startdate>20130101</startdate><enddate>20130101</enddate><creator>Chandler, Jake</creator><general>Springer</general><general>Springer Netherlands</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>AABKS</scope><scope>ABSDQ</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AIMQZ</scope><scope>AVQMV</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>GB0</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>K50</scope><scope>LIQON</scope><scope>M1D</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20130101</creationdate><title>Contrastive confirmation: some competing accounts</title><author>Chandler, Jake</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c338t-8c8918e6b257aa27f3b68439e625675337e4c4fcf6c71c2f53556f7e5ae385a43</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2013</creationdate><topic>Bayesian analysis</topic><topic>Betting</topic><topic>Conditional probabilities</topic><topic>Education</topic><topic>Epistemology</topic><topic>Evidentiality</topic><topic>Intuition</topic><topic>Law of likelihood</topic><topic>Logic</topic><topic>Metaphysics</topic><topic>Model theory</topic><topic>Pasta</topic><topic>Philosophy</topic><topic>Philosophy of Language</topic><topic>Philosophy of Science</topic><topic>Pizzas</topic><topic>Probability distributions</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Chandler, Jake</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Philosophy Collection</collection><collection>Philosophy Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest One Literature</collection><collection>Arts Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>DELNET Social Sciences & Humanities Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>Access via Art, Design & Architecture Collection (ProQuest)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Literature - U.S. Customers Only</collection><collection>Arts & Humanities Database</collection><collection>Research Library</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><jtitle>Synthese (Dordrecht)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Chandler, Jake</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Contrastive confirmation: some competing accounts</atitle><jtitle>Synthese (Dordrecht)</jtitle><stitle>Synthese</stitle><date>2013-01-01</date><risdate>2013</risdate><volume>190</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>129</spage><epage>138</epage><pages>129-138</pages><issn>0039-7857</issn><eissn>1573-0964</eissn><abstract>I outline four competing probabilistic accounts of contrastive evidential support and consider various considerations that might help arbitrate between these. The upshot of the discussion is that the so-called 'Law of Likelihood' is to be preferred to any of the alternatives considered.</abstract><cop>Dordrecht</cop><pub>Springer</pub><doi>10.1007/s11229-010-9845-9</doi><tpages>10</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0039-7857 |
| ispartof | Synthese (Dordrecht), 2013-01, Vol.190 (1), p.129-138 |
| issn | 0039-7857 1573-0964 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_1266485187 |
| source | SpringerLink Journals; JSTOR Archive Collection A-Z Listing |
| subjects | Bayesian analysis Betting Conditional probabilities Education Epistemology Evidentiality Intuition Law of likelihood Logic Metaphysics Model theory Pasta Philosophy Philosophy of Language Philosophy of Science Pizzas Probability distributions |
| title | Contrastive confirmation: some competing accounts |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-24T02%3A26%3A19IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Contrastive%20confirmation:%20some%20competing%20accounts&rft.jtitle=Synthese%20(Dordrecht)&rft.au=Chandler,%20Jake&rft.date=2013-01-01&rft.volume=190&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=129&rft.epage=138&rft.pages=129-138&rft.issn=0039-7857&rft.eissn=1573-0964&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s11229-010-9845-9&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E23324594%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1266485187&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_jstor_id=23324594&rfr_iscdi=true |