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
Revision history
Archival date: 2020-03-24
View upload history
References found in this work BETA

View all 95 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Added to PP index
2017-04-01

Total views
86 ( #33,597 of 47,326 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
27 ( #27,294 of 47,326 )

How can I increase my downloads?

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