Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. William James on Risk, Efficacy, and Evidentialism.P. D. Magnus - forthcoming - Episteme:1-13.
    William James’ argument against William Clifford in The Will to Believe is often understood in terms of doxastic efficacy, the power of belief to influence an outcome. Although that is one strand of James’ argument, there is another which is driven by ampliative risk. The second strand of James’ argument, when applied to scientific cases, is tantamount to what is now called the Argument from Inductive Risk. Either strand of James’ argument is sufficient to rebut Clifford's strong evidentialism and show (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Background Theories and Total Science.P. D. Magnus - 2005 - Philosophy of Science 72 (5):1064-1075.
    Background theories in science are used both to prove and to disprove that theory choice is underdetermined by data. The alleged proof appeals to the fact that experiments to decide between theories typically require auxiliary assumptions from other theories. If this generates a kind of underdetermination, it shows that standards of scientific inference are fallible and must be appropriately contextualized. The alleged disproof appeals to the possibility of suitable background theories to show that no theory choice can be timelessly or (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations  
  • Anjan Chakravartty: Scientific Ontology: Integrating Naturalized Metaphysics and Voluntarist Epistemology, Book Review. [REVIEW]Ragnar van der Merwe - 2019 - Empedocles: European Journal for the Philosophy of Communication 10 (1):109-119.
    Scientific Ontology: Integrating Naturalized Metaphysics and Voluntarist Epistemology, Anjan Chakravartty (2017) New York: Oxford University Press, 296 pp., ISBN 978 0 19065 145 9, h/bk, £53.00.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • The Identical Rivals Response to Underdetermination.Greg Frost-Arnold & P. D. Magnus - 2009 - In P. D. Magnus Jacob Busch (ed.), New Waves in Philosophy of Science. Palgrave-Macmillan.
    The underdetermination of theory by data obtains when, inescapably, evidence is insufficient to allow scientists to decide responsibly between rival theories. One response to would-be underdetermination is to deny that the rival theories are distinct theories at all, insisting instead that they are just different formulations of the same underlying theory; we call this the identical rivals response. An argument adapted from John Norton suggests that the response is presumptively always appropriate, while another from Larry Laudan and Jarrett Leplin suggests (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • Should We Draw a Line Between Business And Ethics?Yusuke Kaneko - 2011 - The ACERP 2011 Conference Proceedings 1 (1):195-208.
    Referring to the difference between Stakeholder Theory and Shareholder Theory, the ethical direction for companies to take is deeply discussed.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • Reckoning the Shape of Everything: Underdetermination and Cosmotopology.P. D. Magnus - 2005 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 56 (3):541-557.
    This paper offers a general characterization of underdetermination and gives a prima facie case for the underdetermination of the topology of the universe. A survey of several philosophical approaches to the problem fails to resolve the issue: the case involves the possibility of massive reduplication, but Strawson on massive reduplication provides no help here; it is not obvious that any of the rival theories are to be preferred on grounds of simplicity; and the usual talk of empirically equivalent theories misses (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   11 citations