An application of Carnapian inductive logic to an argument in the philosophy of statistics

I claim that an argument from the philosophy of statistics can be improved by using Carnapian inductive logic. \citet{GelmanShalizi2012} criticise a philosophical account of how statisticians ought to choose statistical models which they call `the received view of Bayesian inference' and propose a different account inspired by falsificationist philosophy of science. I introduce another philosophical account inspired by Carnapian inductive logic and argue that it is even better than Gelman and Shalizi's falsificationist account.