[OPE-L:4201] Bayesian confirmationism

From: P.J.Wells@open.ac.uk
Date: Sat Oct 21 2000 - 13:52:53 EDT


This is about the first part of your P.S. in #4200

> P.S.  I agree with you on the need for theories and interpretations to be
> susceptible of empirical disconfirmation (though I also think confirming
> evidence can sometimes be meaningful; it is a matter of probabilities).
	Is this an endorsement of Bayesianism? But why only "sometimes"
meaningful? (Presumably if evidence is indeed confirmatory it must raise
one's degree of belief).


This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Oct 31 2000 - 00:00:10 EST