A Definition of Degree of Confirmation for Very Rich Languages
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 10707176 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Hilary Putnam (Princeton University, corresponding author) |
| Year | 1956 |
| Volume | 23 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 58-62 |
| Publication date | 1956-01-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Philosophy of Science (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0031-8248 • E-ISSN: 1539-767X |
| Publisher | Cambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1086/287461 |
| OpenAlex | W2081503978 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 1 |
| References cited | 1 |
Carnap's system of inductive logic (1) has very often been criticized on the ground that “degree of confirmation” is defined only for languages which are extremely over-simplified. Allegedly, it would be very difficult—and perhaps impossible—to define it adequately for languages formalized within the higher predicate calculi, or languages equivalent to these in richness, and it is such languages that would be needed were we ever to formalize the language of empirical science as a whole. Thus, this criticism bears not only on Carnap's work, but on all attempts to construct an exact analysis of induction from this particular standpoint; that is, from the standpoint of “logical measure functions.”
Calculus (dental) · Construct (python library) · Criticism · Degree (music) · Epistemology · Linguistics · Literature · Predicate (mathematical logic) · Programming language · Computer Science · Mathematics · Philosophy · Philosophy and History of Science · Philosophy, Science, and History · Semantic Web and Ontologies
| Unique citing works | 1 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0.02 |
| Citation span | 1963 - 1963 (1) |
| Citation velocity | historical |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 1 |