Abstract
Thomas Weston has commented Niiniluoto’s Truthlikeness (Niiniluoto, 1987a) with the following words:
The examples in Niiniluoto (1987) divide roughly into two categories: (a) those that use an approach similar to approximate truth, and (b) those which use the apparatus of Q predicates [i.e. predicates used in forming monadic constituents]. Cases of the first sort include some assessments of actual or candidate physical laws, (e.g., Snell’s law)... Cases of type (b), which do use Δ sum [i.e. the sum which appears in the definition of M γγ’ ms : the sum of the distances that the alternatives allowed by a hypothesis have from the truth] are exclusively toy examples, which illustrate the technical apparatus of verisimilitude, but are not real applications of it. (Weston, 1992, p. 71.)
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1996 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Kieseppä, I.A. (1996). Concluding Remarks. In: Truthlikeness for Multidimensional, Quantitative Cognitive Problems. Synthese Library, vol 254. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-0550-9_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-0550-9_8
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-90-481-4692-5
Online ISBN: 978-94-017-0550-9
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive