Abstract
In this chapter we shall consider three arguments that share one common and erroneous assumption.1 The arguments appeared separately in 1954, 2 19563 and 1959, 4 and will be considered in that order. In section two I distinguish briefly three kinds of concepts, namely, classificatory, comparative and quantitative concepts. These distinctions are necessary for a clear understanding of the arguments in the other sections. In section three I present Popper’s argument that probability must not be identified with confirmation because a measure of confirmation cannot satisfy certain rules of the Probability Calculus.5 Section four contains a reductio ad absurdum refutation of Popper’s 1954 argument. Sections five and seven contain Popper’s 1956 and 1959 arguments respectively. Reductio ad absurdum refutations of each of these arguments are constructed in sections six and eight. Although the reductio ad absurdum arguments must be conclusive as far as Popper is concerned (because they are based on Popper’s own assumptions) they are not otherwise admissible. They are not otherwise admissible because one of Popper’s assumptions is plainly false (as shown in section ten). However, in sections nine through eleven the view of J. G. Kemeny6 and Carnap7 regarding the three arguments is elaborated and defended.
Keywords
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Notes
J. G. Kemeny, “Review of K. R. Popper ‘Degree of Confirmation,’” Journal of Symbolic Logic, XX (1955), 304–305.
Rudolf Carnap, “Remarks on Probability,” Philosophical Studies, XIV (1963), 65–75
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1971 Martinus Nijhoff, The Hague, Netherlands
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Michalos, A.C. (1971). Two Explicanda and Three Arguments. In: The Popper-Carnap Controversy. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-3048-9_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-3048-9_3
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-90-247-5127-3
Online ISBN: 978-94-010-3048-9
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive