By Paul Bartha
By Parallel Reasoning is the 1st accomplished philosophical exam of analogical reasoning in additional than 40 years designed to formulate and justify criteria for the serious review of analogical arguments. It proposes a normative conception with specific specialize in using analogies in arithmetic and technological know-how.
In fresh a long time, study on analogy has been ruled by way of computational theories whose aim has been to version analogical reasoning as a mental technique. those theories have committed little cognizance to normative questions. during this publication Bartha proposes solid analogical argument needs to articulate a transparent courting that's able to generalization. this concept results in a suite of special versions for the severe research of well-liked different types of analogical argument. an analogous middle precept makes it attainable to narrate analogical reasoning to norms and values of medical perform. Reasoning by way of analogy is justified since it moves an optimum stability among conservative values, similar to simplicity and coherence, and innovative values, akin to fruitfulness and theoretical unification. Analogical arguments also are justified through attract symmetry--like instances are to be handled alike.
In elaborating the relationship among analogy and those huge epistemic rules, By Parallel Reasoning deals a singular contribution to explaining how analogies can play a massive position within the affirmation of clinical hypotheses
Read or Download By Parallel Reasoning PDF
Similar logic & language books
This volumes target is to supply an creation to Carnaps publication from a historic and philosophical viewpoint, every one bankruptcy concentrating on one particular factor. The ebook might be of curiosity not just to Carnap students yet to all these attracted to the historical past of analytical philosophy.
Unique and penetrating, this e-book investigates of the suggestion of inference from indicators, which performed a important function in historical philosophical and clinical approach. It examines a major bankruptcy in historic epistemology: the debates in regards to the nature of proof and of the inferences in response to it--or symptoms and sign-inferences as they have been referred to as in antiquity.
The philosophical examine of what exists and what it potential for anything to exist is likely one of the middle issues of metaphysics. This advent to ontology offers readers with a finished account of the imperative principles of the topic of being. This publication is split into elements. the 1st half explores questions of natural philosophical ontology: what's intended through the concept that of being, why there exists whatever instead of not anything, and why there's just one logically contingent genuine international.
This quantity explores counterfactual concept and language. we will mostly evaluation counterfactual questions probabilistically, predicting what will be most probably or not going to take place. Schulz describes those probabilistic methods of comparing counterfactual questions and turns the knowledge right into a novel account of the workings of counterfactual suggestion.
Extra info for By Parallel Reasoning
CS5) Analogies involving causal relations are more plausible than those not involving causal relations. (CS6) Structural analogies are stronger than those based on superﬁcial similarities. , to the hypothetical analogy) must be taken into account. (CS8) Multiple analogies supporting the same conclusion make the argument stronger. 20. See Aristotle’s Topics and Prior Analytics, Mill’s A System of Logic (1843/1930), Keynes’s A Treatise on Probability (1921), and numerous logic texts including Robinson (1930), Stebbing (1933), and Copi (1961).
Scientists still use analogical reasoning to support the conjecture that, even if Mars is now dead, it might once have supported life (McKay 1993). The Rover expeditions of 2003–04 bolstered this argument with the ﬁnding that ancient Mars possessed liquid water in abundance. It might be argued at this juncture that the problems of vagueness and of weighing competing criteria simply reﬂect the reality of working with an 21. Variants of the argument are found in Stebbing (1933), Mill (1843/1930), Robinson (1930), and Copi (1961).
Campbell has nineteenth-century antecedents in Whewell and Herschel. As Snyder (2006) has pointed out, both of these thinkers rejected an unrestricted hypothetico-deductive model of conﬁrmation, according to which any hypothesis receives support if its deductive consequences are veriﬁed by observation. ” A vera causa is a possible cause that is worthy of testing. Herschel insisted that a vera causa had to be “analogous to causes that are already known to have produced similar effects in other cases” (Snyder 2006, 201)—that is, a cause of a sort that is known to exist in nature.
- Something to reckon with: The logic of terms by George Englebretsen
- Biomedical Technology by Thomas Lenarz, Peter Wriggers (eds.)