Predicting novel facts

British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 33 (1):1-15 (1982)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This article has no associated abstract. (fix it)

Categories

Keywords

Reprint years

DOI

10.1093/bjps/33.1.1

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 100,888

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

My notes

Similar books and articles

A Scenario Approach to the Simonshaven Case.Peter J. van Koppen & Anne Ruth Mackor - 2020 - Topics in Cognitive Science 12 (4):1132-1151.
Novel facts and bayesianism.Ilkka Niiniluoto - 1983 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 34 (4):375-379.
Bayesianism and support by novel facts.Colin Howson - 1984 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 35 (3):245-251.
Michael R. Gardner.Phillip Frank & Niels Bohr - 1986 - In Robert G. Colodny (ed.), From Quarks to Quasars: Philosophical Problems of Modern Physics. University of Pittsburgh Press. pp. 203.
David Kaplan and Richard Montague. A paradox regained. Notre Dame journal of formal logic, vol. 1 , pp. 79–90. - Martin Gardner. A new prediction paradox. The British journal for the philosophy of science, vol. 13 , p. 51. - K. R. Popper. A comment on the new prediction paradox. The British journal for the philosophy of science, vol. 13 , p. 51. [REVIEW]James Cargile - 1965 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 30 (1):102-103.
Truth and provability: A comment on Redhead.Panu Raatikainen - 2005 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 56 (3):611-613.
David Miller. A paradox of information. The British journal for the philosophy of science, vol. 17 no. 1 , pp. 59–61. - Karl R. Popper. A comment on Miller's new paradox of information. The British journal for the philosophy of science, vol. 17 no. 1 , pp. 61–69. - Karl R. Popper. A paradox of zero information. The British journal for the philosophy of science, vol. 17 no. 2, pp. 141–143. - J. L. Mackie. Miller's so-called paradox of information.The British journal for the philosophy of science, vol. 17 no. 2, pp. 144–147. - David Miller. On a so-called so-called paradox: a reply to Professor J. L. Mackie.The British journal for the philosophy of science, vol. 17 no. 2, pp. 147–149. - Jeffrey Bub and Michael Radner. Miller's paradox of information.The British journal for the philosophy of science, vol. 19 no. 1 , pp. 63–67. - David Miller. The straight and narrow rule of induction: a reply to Dr Bub and Mr Radner.The British journal for the philosophy of science, vol. 19 no. 2, pp. 145. [REVIEW]Richard C. Jeffrey - 1970 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 35 (1):124-127.
"F. R. Leavis": Michael Bell. [REVIEW]K. M. Newton - 1990 - British Journal of Aesthetics 30 (1):93.
Another Look at Novel Facts.Nancey Murphy - 1989 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 20 (3):385.

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
60 (#355,311)

6 months
7 (#704,497)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

Inference to the Best explanation.Peter Lipton - 2005 - In Martin Curd & Stathis Psillos (eds.), The Routledge Companion to Philosophy of Science. New York: Routledge. pp. 193.
Novel evidence and severe tests.Deborah G. Mayo - 1991 - Philosophy of Science 58 (4):523-552.
State of the Field: Why novel prediction matters.Heather Douglas & P. D. Magnus - 2013 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 44 (4):580-589.

View all 40 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

Logical foundations of probability.Rudolf Carnap - 1950 - Chicago]: Chicago University of Chicago Press.
The aim and structure of physical theory.Pierre Maurice Marie Duhem - 1954 - Princeton,: Princeton University Press.
Theory and Evidence.Clark N. Glymour - 1980 - Princeton University Press.
Conjectures and Refutations.K. Popper - 1962 - Les Etudes Philosophiques 21 (3):431-434.

View all 27 references / Add more references