Lutz, Sebastian (2011) On Likelihoodism and Intelligent Design. [Preprint]
| PDF Download (142Kb) | Preview |
Abstract
Two common and plausible claims in the philosophy of science are that (i) a theory that makes no predictions is not testable and (ii) one cannot confirm a theory by criticizing a competing one absent further assumptions about their relation. Elliott Sober has developed these claims within likelihoodism, which defines the testability and confirmation of a theory only in contrast to another, and has argued that the claims hold for intelligent design (ID) when contrasted with evolutionary theory (ET). I show that Sober’s arguments rely on a contentious hidden premise, and that within likelihoodism, both claims are false for ID and ET under his assumptions and one very weak further assumption about ID and ET. I then show that, given Sober’s assumptions, the claims are true for a non-contrastive criterion of testability close to the Bayesian one and the relevance criterion of confirmation.
| Export/Citation: | EndNote | BibTeX | Dublin Core | ASCII/Text Citation (Chicago) | HTML Citation | OpenURL |
| Social Networking: |
| Item Type: | Preprint |
|---|---|
| Additional Information: | To be presented at the APA Eastern Division Meeting, Washington, DC, December 27th–30th 2011 |
| Keywords: | likelihoodism; Bayesianism; testability; confirmation; empirical significance; intelligent design |
| Subjects: | Specific Sciences > Biology > Evolutionary Theory General Issues > Confirmation/Induction General Issues > Science vs. Pseudoscience General Issues > Theory/Observation |
| Depositing User: | Sebastian Lutz |
| Date Deposited: | 15 May 2011 11:45 |
| Last Modified: | 15 May 2011 11:45 |
| Item ID: | 8608 |
| URI: | http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/id/eprint/8608 |
Actions (login required)
| View Item |


