Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-vfjqv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-26T01:39:56.391Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Truthlikeness for Quantitative Statements

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 February 2022

Ilkka Niiniluoto
Ilkka Niiniluoto*
Affiliation:
University of Helsinki
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

In A History of the Mathematical Theory of Probability (1865), I. Todhunter tells that among the “learned conversations” of the Florentine gentlemen the following question was once proposed: “A horse is really worth a hundred crowns, one person estimated it at ten crowns and another at a thousand; which of the two made the more extravagant estimate?” When consulted on this matter, Galileo pronounced the two estimates to be equally extravagant, “because the ratio of a thousand to a hundred is the same as the ratio of a hundred to ten”. A priest named Nozzolini thought that the higher estimate is more mistaken, since “the excess of a thousand above a hundred is greater than that of a hundred above ten.” (p. 5).

Todhunter's comment on this issue is interesting: it does not appear to him that “the discussion is of any scientific interest or value”.

Type
Part V. Measurement, Verisimilitude and Decision
Information
PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association , Volume 1982 , Issue 1: Volume One: Contributed Papers 1982 , 1982 , pp. 208 - 216
Copyright
Copyright © Philosophy of Science Association 1982

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

Carnap, R. (1971). “A Basic System of Inductive Logic. Part I.” In Studies in Inductive Logic and Probability. Volume I. Edited by Carnap, R. and Jeffrey, R.. Berkeley: University of California Press. Pages 33–165.Google Scholar
Carnap, R. (1980). “A Basic System of Inductive Logic. Part II.”. In Studies in Inductive Logic and Probability. Volume II. Edited by Jeffrey, R.. Berkeley: University of California Press. Pages 7–155.Google Scholar
Ferguson, T.S. (1967). Mathematical Statistics: A Decision-Theoretic Approach. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Hilpinen, R. (1976). “Approximate Truth and Truthlikeness.” In Formal Methods in the Methodology of the Empirical Sciences. Edited by Przelecki, M., et al. Dordrecht: Reidel. Pages 19–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krajewski, W. (1977). Correspondence Principle and the Growth of Knowledge. Dordrecht: Reidel.Google Scholar
Laudan, L. (1981). “A Confutation of Convergent Realism.” Philosophy of Science 48: 19–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, D. (1975). “The Accuracy of Predictions.” Synthese 30: 159–191, 207-219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Niiniluoto, I. (1977). “On the Truthlikeness of Generalizations.” In Basic Problems in Methodology and Linguistics. (University of Western Ontario Series in the Philosophy of Science. Volume 11, Part 3.) Edited by Butts, R.E. and Hintikka, J.. Dordrecht: Reidel. Pages 121–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Niiniluoto, I. (1978). “Truthlikeness : Comments on Recent Discussion.” Synthese 38: 281–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Niiniluoto, I. (1980). “Scientific Progress.” Synthese 45: 427–462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Niiniluoto, I. (1982). “What Shall We Do With Verisimilitude?” Philosophy of Science 49: 181–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nowak, L. (1980). The Structure of Idealization. Dordrecht: Reidel.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oddie, G. (1978). “Verisimilitude and Distance in Logical Space.” In The Logic and Epistemology of Scientific Change. (Acta Philosophica Fennioa 30.) Edited by Niiniluoto, I. and Tuomela, R.. Amsterdam: North Holland. Pages 227–242.Google Scholar
Simmons, G.F. (1963). Introduction to Topology and Modern Analysis. New York: McGraw Hill.Google Scholar
Tichý, P. (1978). “Verisimilitude Revisited.” Synthese 38: 175–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Todhunter, I. (1865). A History of the Mathematical Theory of Probability from the Time of Pascal to that of Laplaoe. (As reprinted New York: Chelsea Publishing Company, 1919.)Google Scholar
Watkins, J. (1978). “Corroboration and the Problem of Content-Comparison.” In Progress and Rationality in Science. Edited by Radnitzky, G. and Andersson, G.. Dordrecht: Reidel. Pages 339–378.10.1007/978-94-009-9866-7_16CrossRefGoogle Scholar