Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. (1 other version)Cost-Benefit versus Expected Utility Acceptance Rules.Alex C. Michalos - 1970 - PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1970 (1):375-402.
    A rule for the acceptance of scientific hypotheses called 'the principle of cost-benefit dominance' is shown to be more effective and efficient than the well-known principle of the maximization of expected utility. Harvey 's defense of his theory of the circulation of blood in animals is examined as a historical paradigm case of a successful defense of a scientific hypothesis and as an implicit application of the cost-benefit dominance rule advocated here. Finally, various concepts of 'dominance' are considered by means (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • (1 other version)Cost-benefit versus expected utility acceptance rules.Alex C. Michalos - 1970 - Theory and Decision 1 (1):61-88.
    A rule for the acceptance of scientific hypotheses called ‘the principle of cost-benefit dominance’ is shown to be more effective and efficient than the well-known principle of the maximization of expected (epistemic) utility. Harvey's defense of his theory of the circulation of blood in animals is examined as a historical paradigm case of a successful defense of a scientific hypothesis and as an implicit application of the cost-benefit dominance rule advocated here. Finally, various concepts of ‘dominance’ are considered by means (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  • Ethics counselors as a new priesthood.Alex C. Michalos - 2001 - Journal of Business Ethics 29 (1-2):3 - 17.
    The aim of this paper is to critically evaluate the thesis that ethics counselors constitute a new priesthood in the pejorative sense of this term. In defense of the thesis, an account is given of the diverse variety of fundamental ideas about ethics or morality. The underlying argument is simply that there is such a diversity of opinion about so many fundamental issues that most ethical appraisals, especially in committees, are probably very shallow and barely warranted. Following this negative work, (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations