Lutz, Sebastian (2011) On a Contrastive Criterion of Testability II: The Material Inadequacy of Contrastive Testability. [Preprint]

Preview

PDF Download (261Kb) | Preview

Abstract

Elliott Sober has suggested his contrastive criterion of testability as an improvement over previous criteria of empirical significance like falsifiability and the standard Bayesian criterion of empirical significance. I argue that the criterion fails to meet four of the conditions of adequacy for a criterion of empirical significance that follow from Sober’s position or are presumed in his arguments. I suggest to define empirical significance as empirical non-equivalence to a tautology, because this definition does meet the conditions of adequacy. Specifically, it is equivalent to the standard Bayesian criterion of empirical significance whenever all probabilities are defined and contains falsifiability as a special case. This latter feature is important because those conditions of adequacy that apply to criteria of deductive empirical significance single out falsifiability.

Available Versions of this Item

• On Sober's Criterion of Contrastive Testability. (deposited 14 Dec 2010 07:08)
  • On a Contrastive Criterion of Testability II: The Material Inadequacy of Contrastive Testability. (deposited 18 Apr 2011 07:37)[Currently Displayed]
  • On a Contrastive Criterion of Testability I: Defining Contrastive Testability. (deposited 18 Apr 2011 07:37)

Actions (login required)