Goodman, 'grue' and Hempel*
نویسنده
چکیده
It is now commonly accepted that N. Goodman's predicate "grue" presents the theory of confirmation of C. G. Hempel (and other such theories) with grave difficulties. The precise nature and status of these "difficulties" has, however, never been made clear. In this paper it is argued that it is very unlikely that "grue" raises any formal difficulties for Hempel and appearances to the contrary are examined, rejected and an explanation of their intuitive appeal offered. However "grue" is shown to raise an informal, "over-arching" difficulty of great magnitude for all theories of confirmation, including Hempel's theory.
منابع مشابه
Goodman's "New Riddle"
First, a brief historical trace of the developments in confirmation theory leading up to Goodman’s infamous “grue” paradox is presented. Then, Goodman’s argument is analyzed from both Hempelian and Bayesian perspectives. A guiding analogy is drawn between certain arguments against classical deductive logic, and Goodman’s “grue” argument against classical inductive logic. The upshot of this anal...
متن کاملOn the equivalence of Goodman's and Hempel's paradoxes.
Historically, Nelson Goodman's paradox involving the predicates 'grue' and 'bleen' has been taken to furnish a serious blow to Carl Hempel's theory of confirmation in particular and to purely formal theories of confirmation in general. In this paper, I argue that Goodman's paradox is no more serious of a threat to Hempel's theory of confirmation than is Hempel's own paradox of the ravens. I pro...
متن کاملGreen is Simpler than Grue ∗
Goodman’s grue-bleen paradox relies on the claim that the predicate “green” is not simpler than the predicate “grue”, and that, for that reason, the choice between them is arbitrary. It is argued that this claim can only be made in a restricted model, in which functions have primitive names but particular values do not. In more natural models, which allow values to have proper names as well, th...
متن کاملHow Bayesian Confirmation Theory Handles the Paradox of the Ravens
The Paradox of the Ravens (a.k.a,, The Paradox of Confirmation) is indeed an old chestnut. A great many things have been written and said about this paradox and its implications for the logic of evidential support. The first part of this paper will provide a brief survey of the early history of the paradox. This will include the original formulation of the paradox and the early responses of Hem...
متن کاملThe Paradox of Confirmation 1
Hempel first introduced the paradox of confirmation in 1937. Since then, a very extensive literature on the paradox has evolved (Vranas 2004). Much of this literature can be seen as responding to Hempel’s subsequent discussions and analyses of the paradox (Hempel 1945). Recently, it was noted that Hempel’s intuitive (and plausible) resolution of the paradox was inconsistent with his official th...
متن کامل