BROWSE

Related Researcher

Author's Photo

Park, Seungbae
School of Liberal Arts
Research Interests
  • Philosophy of Science

ITEM VIEW & DOWNLOAD

Approximate Truth vs. Empirical Adequacy

DC Field Value Language
dc.contributor.author Park, Seungbae ko
dc.date.available 2014-09-11T06:54:58Z -
dc.date.created 2014-09-05 ko
dc.date.issued 2014-01 ko
dc.identifier.citation EPISTEMOLOGIA, v.37, no.1, pp.106 - 118 ko
dc.identifier.issn 0392-9760 ko
dc.identifier.uri https://scholarworks.unist.ac.kr/handle/201301/5790 -
dc.description.abstract Suppose that scientific realists believe that a successful theory is approximately true, and that constructive empiricists believe that it is empirically adequate. Whose belief is more likely to be false? The problem of underdetermination does not yield an answer to this question one way or the other, but the pessimistic induction does. The pessimistic induction, if correct, indicates that successful theories, both past and current, are empirically inadequate. It is arguable, however, that they are approximately true. Therefore, scientific realists overall take less epistemic risk than constructive empiricists. ko
dc.description.statementofresponsibility open -
dc.language 영어 ko
dc.publisher TILGHER-GENOVA S A S ko
dc.title Approximate Truth vs. Empirical Adequacy ko
dc.type ARTICLE ko
dc.identifier.scopusid 2-s2.0-84984706176 ko
dc.identifier.wosid 000209635500007 ko
dc.type.rims ART ko
dc.identifier.doi 10.3280/EPIS2014-001007 ko
dc.identifier.url http://www.francoangeli.it/riviste/Scheda_rivista.aspx?IDArticolo=51572 ko
Appears in Collections:
SLA_Journal Papers

find_unist can give you direct access to the published full text of this article. (UNISTARs only)

Show simple item record

qrcode

  • mendeley

    citeulike

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

MENU