Scientific reasoning and Probability: a Comparison between Bayesianism and Error Statistics
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2014 |
Outros Autores: | |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | por |
Título da fonte: | Principia (Florianópolis. Online) |
Texto Completo: | https://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/principia/article/view/1808-1711.2014v18n1p115 |
Resumo: | The article presents two alternative proposals for the use of probability to analyze scientific reasoning: Bayesianism and error statistics. The debate between these two approaches is one of the most important issues in contemporary Philosophy of Science and is a continuation of the well-known debate between Popper and Kuhn. The article presents the explanations offered by Bayesianism for specific phenomena of scientific activity that other approaches have difficulty in explaining, like the ravens paradox. Despite its positive results as a research program, Bayesianism has been the target of strong criticism, for instance, because it allegedly does not offer an adequate solution to Duhemt’s problem. Error Statistics in particular proposes the application of statistical methods and probability calculus to explain scientific reasoning in a way radically different from Bayesianism. The debate started by Popper and Kuhn is continued in probabilistic terms and is far from ended. |
id |
UFSC-5_53149ad648507953b14ea9e199e3417d |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:periodicos.ufsc.br:article/30586 |
network_acronym_str |
UFSC-5 |
network_name_str |
Principia (Florianópolis. Online) |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Scientific reasoning and Probability: a Comparison between Bayesianism and Error StatisticsRaciocínio científico e probabilidade: uma comparação entre o bayesianismo e a estatística do erroThe article presents two alternative proposals for the use of probability to analyze scientific reasoning: Bayesianism and error statistics. The debate between these two approaches is one of the most important issues in contemporary Philosophy of Science and is a continuation of the well-known debate between Popper and Kuhn. The article presents the explanations offered by Bayesianism for specific phenomena of scientific activity that other approaches have difficulty in explaining, like the ravens paradox. Despite its positive results as a research program, Bayesianism has been the target of strong criticism, for instance, because it allegedly does not offer an adequate solution to Duhemt’s problem. Error Statistics in particular proposes the application of statistical methods and probability calculus to explain scientific reasoning in a way radically different from Bayesianism. The debate started by Popper and Kuhn is continued in probabilistic terms and is far from ended.O artigo apresenta os principais elementos de dois enfoques alternativos para o uso do cálculo de probabilidades na análise do raciocínio científico: o bayesianismo e a estatística do erro. O debate entre essas correntes é um dos mais relevantes da filosofia da ciência contemporânea e constitui uma continuação do conhecido debate entre Popper e Kuhn. São apresentadas explicações do bayesianismo que outros enfoques têm dificuldade em justificar, especialmente o paradoxo dos corvos. Não obstante seus pontos positivos, o enfoque bayesiano não está imune a críticas, como a de que não soluciona adequadamente o problema de Duhem. A estatística do erro, em particular, propõe a aplicação de métodos estatísticos e do cálculo de probabilidades para explicar o raciocínio científico de forma radicalmente distinta do bayesianismo. Com isso, o debate iniciado por Popper e Kuhn tem uma continuação em termos probabilísticos e está longe de concluído.Federal University of Santa Catarina – UFSC2014-05-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/principia/article/view/1808-1711.2014v18n1p11510.5007/1808-1711.2014v18n1p115Principia: an international journal of epistemology; Vol. 18 No. 1 (2014); 115-134Principia: an international journal of epistemology; Vol. 18 Núm. 1 (2014); 115-134Principia: an international journal of epistemology; v. 18 n. 1 (2014); 115-1341808-17111414-4247reponame:Principia (Florianópolis. Online)instname:Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC)instacron:UFSCporhttps://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/principia/article/view/1808-1711.2014v18n1p115/27782Copyright (c) 2021 Agnaldo Cuoco Portugal, Breno Hermanninfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessPortugal, Agnaldo CuocoHermann, Breno2019-09-13T09:32:14Zoai:periodicos.ufsc.br:article/30586Revistahttps://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/principiaPUBhttps://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/principia/oaiprincipia@contato.ufsc.br||principia@contato.ufsc.br1808-17111414-4247opendoar:2019-09-13T09:32:14Principia (Florianópolis. Online) - Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Scientific reasoning and Probability: a Comparison between Bayesianism and Error Statistics Raciocínio científico e probabilidade: uma comparação entre o bayesianismo e a estatística do erro |
title |
Scientific reasoning and Probability: a Comparison between Bayesianism and Error Statistics |
spellingShingle |
Scientific reasoning and Probability: a Comparison between Bayesianism and Error Statistics Portugal, Agnaldo Cuoco |
title_short |
Scientific reasoning and Probability: a Comparison between Bayesianism and Error Statistics |
title_full |
Scientific reasoning and Probability: a Comparison between Bayesianism and Error Statistics |
title_fullStr |
Scientific reasoning and Probability: a Comparison between Bayesianism and Error Statistics |
title_full_unstemmed |
Scientific reasoning and Probability: a Comparison between Bayesianism and Error Statistics |
title_sort |
Scientific reasoning and Probability: a Comparison between Bayesianism and Error Statistics |
author |
Portugal, Agnaldo Cuoco |
author_facet |
Portugal, Agnaldo Cuoco Hermann, Breno |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Hermann, Breno |
author2_role |
author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Portugal, Agnaldo Cuoco Hermann, Breno |
description |
The article presents two alternative proposals for the use of probability to analyze scientific reasoning: Bayesianism and error statistics. The debate between these two approaches is one of the most important issues in contemporary Philosophy of Science and is a continuation of the well-known debate between Popper and Kuhn. The article presents the explanations offered by Bayesianism for specific phenomena of scientific activity that other approaches have difficulty in explaining, like the ravens paradox. Despite its positive results as a research program, Bayesianism has been the target of strong criticism, for instance, because it allegedly does not offer an adequate solution to Duhemt’s problem. Error Statistics in particular proposes the application of statistical methods and probability calculus to explain scientific reasoning in a way radically different from Bayesianism. The debate started by Popper and Kuhn is continued in probabilistic terms and is far from ended. |
publishDate |
2014 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2014-05-01 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/principia/article/view/1808-1711.2014v18n1p115 10.5007/1808-1711.2014v18n1p115 |
url |
https://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/principia/article/view/1808-1711.2014v18n1p115 |
identifier_str_mv |
10.5007/1808-1711.2014v18n1p115 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
por |
language |
por |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/principia/article/view/1808-1711.2014v18n1p115/27782 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2021 Agnaldo Cuoco Portugal, Breno Hermann info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2021 Agnaldo Cuoco Portugal, Breno Hermann |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Federal University of Santa Catarina – UFSC |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Federal University of Santa Catarina – UFSC |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Principia: an international journal of epistemology; Vol. 18 No. 1 (2014); 115-134 Principia: an international journal of epistemology; Vol. 18 Núm. 1 (2014); 115-134 Principia: an international journal of epistemology; v. 18 n. 1 (2014); 115-134 1808-1711 1414-4247 reponame:Principia (Florianópolis. Online) instname:Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC) instacron:UFSC |
instname_str |
Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC) |
instacron_str |
UFSC |
institution |
UFSC |
reponame_str |
Principia (Florianópolis. Online) |
collection |
Principia (Florianópolis. Online) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Principia (Florianópolis. Online) - Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina (UFSC) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
principia@contato.ufsc.br||principia@contato.ufsc.br |
_version_ |
1789435112541126656 |