Skip to main content

Quantitative Nomic Truth Approximation

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Nomic Truth Approximation Revisited

Part of the book series: Synthese Library ((SYLI,volume 399))

  • 168 Accesses

Abstract

Assuming that the target of theory oriented empirical science in general and of nomic truth approximation in particular is to characterize the boundary or demarcation between nomic possibilities and nomic impossibilities, I have presented in Chap. 4 (“Models, postulates, and generalized nomic truth approximation”) the ‘basic’ version of generalized nomic truth approximation, starting from ‘two-sided’ theories. Its main claim is that nomic truth approximation can perfectly be achieved by combining two prima facie opposing views on theories: (1) the traditional (Popperian) view: theories are (sets of models of) postulates that exclude certain possibilities from being realizable, enabling explanation and prediction and (2) the model view: theories are sets of models that claim to (approximately) represent certain realizable possibilities. Nomic truth approximation, i.e., increasing truth-content and decreasing falsity-content, becomes in this way revising theories by revising their models and/or their postulates in the face of increasing evidence.

The basic version of generalized nomic truth approximation is in many respects as simple as possible. Among other things, it is qualitative in the sense that it is purely based on set-theoretic relations. The present chapter presents the straightforward quantitative concretization of it. According to the ‘expected success theorem’, based on some probabilistic experimental conditions, greater truthlikeness, or verisimilitude, leads to greater expected empirical success. This enables tentative nomic truth approximation conclusions by abductive reasoning.

Adapted version appeared as: “Quantitative nomic truth approximation by revising models and postulates , European Studies in Philosophy of Science, EPSA15 Selected papers, Eds. M. Massimi, J.W. Romeijn & G. Schurz, Dordrecht, Springer 2017, pp. 309–320. Acknowledgement: I like to thank an anonymous referee for some requests for clarification.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 89.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    The term ‘combined’ will always refer to some combination of sidewise notions and ‘separated clauses’ of the same kind, not necessarily as a strict conjunction. Separated clauses deal with truth- and falsity-content , respectively, and with accepted- and rejected-content, respectively. The term ‘united’ will refer to the union of such separated clauses and clause-wise notions of both relevant kinds.

  2. 2.

    A∆B = def (A−B)∪(B−A).

  3. 3.

    ‘p1vp2’ is short for (p1vp2)&¬(p1&p2), so-called exclusive ‘or’.

  4. 4.

    Note that superscript ‘s’ refers to a success condition, not to sidewise!

  5. 5.

    Note that the proof of the claim (Sect. 5.2.2) that a theory which is closer to the truth than another in the basic sense will become more successful in the long run is a very special case of the present proof.

  6. 6.

    To be sure, by making the weights (strictly) dependent on m(T) and m(cT), it becomes impossible to calculate the increase of verisimilitude of a revised theory (see below) in the standard situation in which we don’t know T.

References

  • Cevolani, G., & Calandra, F. (2009). Approaching the truth via belief change in propositional languages. In M. Suárez, M. Dorato, & M. Rèdei (Eds.), Launch of the European philosophy of science association, EPSA epistemology and methodology of science (Vol. 1, pp. 47–62). Dordrecht: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Cevolani, G., & Festa, R. Manuscript. Features of verisimilitude. Unpublished.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cevolani, G., & Festa, R. (To appear). A partial consequence account of truthlikeness. To appear in a special issue of Synthese in honor of Gerhard Schurz.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cevolani, G., Crupi, V., & Festa, R. (2011). Verisimilitude and belief change for conjunctive theories. Erkenntnis, 75(2), 183–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuipers, T. (2000). From instrumentalism to constructive realism. On some relations between confirmation, empirical progress, and truth approximation. Synthese library (Vol. 287). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuipers, T. (2009). Empirical progress and truth approximation by the ‘Hypothetico-probabilistic method’. Erkenntnis, 70, 313–330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Kuipers, T.A.F. (2019). Quantitative Nomic Truth Approximation. In: Nomic Truth Approximation Revisited. Synthese Library, vol 399. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-98388-2_5

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics