Titlebook: Refined Verisimilitude; Sjoerd D. Zwart Book 2001 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2001 Karl R. Popper.epistemology.logic.philoso

TAG

incredulity

Book 2001 B has more advantages andfewer drawbacks than A. In 1974, however, David Millerand Pavel Tichy proved that Popper‘s formal explication could not be used to compare false theories. Subsequently, many researchers proposed alternatives or tried to improve Popper‘s original definition.

jaunty

Introduction and Terminology,e two different ways to paraphrase theories and data in the algebra foreshadow the paramount distinction between two kinds of approach-to-the-truth proposals: the content and likeness definitions. This distinction is reconstructed in Section 1.4 in terms of two different strategies to revise Popper’

FANG

身心疲憊

infelicitous

Book 2001tations. In the decade before this publication, Popper fiercely attacked the ideas of Rudolf Carnap about confirmation and induction; and ten years later, in the famous tenth chapter of Conjectures he introduced his own ideas about scientific progress and verisimilitude (cf. the quotation on page 6)

吹牛者

委派

Apogee

Truthlikeness,uth using truth-value and logical strength, and were presented in Chapter 2. Truthlikeness definitions establish distance to the truth using similarity between the possible worlds, and are the subject of the present chapter.

純樸