Evidential holism

Philosophy Compass 12 (6):e12417 (2017)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
Evidential holism begins with something like the claim that “it is only jointly as a theory that scientific statements imply their observable consequences.” This is the holistic claim that Elliott Sober tells us is an “unexceptional observation”. But variations on this “unexceptional” claim feature as a premise in a series of controversial arguments for radical conclusions, such as that there is no analytic or synthetic distinction that the meaning of a sentence cannot be understood without understanding the whole language of which it is a part and that all knowledge is empirical knowledge. This paper is a survey of what evidential holism is, how plausible it is, and what consequences it has. Section 1 will distinguish a range of different holistic claims, Sections 2 and 3 explore how well motivated they are and how they relate to one another, and Section 4 returns to the arguments listed above and uses the distinctions from the previous sections to identify holism's role in each case.
Reprint years
2017
PhilPapers/Archive ID
MOREH-3
Upload history
Archival date: 2020-03-24
View other versions
Added to PP index
2017-04-01

Total views
131 ( #31,165 of 53,583 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
43 ( #15,181 of 53,583 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks on external links on PhilPapers.