Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-n9wrp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-22T06:06:44.032Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Challenge to Positive Relevance Theorists: Reply to Roush

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2022

Peter Achinstein
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Recently in this journal Sherrilyn Roush (2004) defends positive relevance as a necessary (albeit not a sufficient) condition for evidence by rejecting two of the counterexamples from my earlier (2001) work. In this reply I argue that Roush's critique is not successful.

Type
Reply
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 71 , Issue 4 , October 2004 , pp. 521 - 524
Copyright
Copyright © The Philosophy of Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Achinstein, Peter (2001), The Book of Evidence. New York: Oxford University Press.10.1093/0195143892.001.0001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roush, Sherrilyn (2004), “Positive Relevance Defended”, Positive Relevance Defended 71:110–116.Google Scholar