Hostname: page-component-84b7d79bbc-fnpn6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-30T14:01:29.852Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Data, Evidence, and Explanatory Power

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2022

Pascal Ströing
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Influential classical and recent approaches to explicate confirmation, explanation, or explanatory power define these relations or degrees between hypotheses and evidence. This holds for both deductive and Bayesian approaches. However, this neglects the role of data, which for many everyday and scientific examples cannot simply be classified as evidence. I present arguments to sharply distinguish data from evidence in Bayesian approaches. Taking into account this distinction, we can rewrite Schupbach and Sprenger’s measure of explanatory power and show the strengths of this adaptation by applying it to the example of the detection of gravitational waves in physics.

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 85 , Issue 3 , July 2018 , pp. 422 - 441
Copyright
Copyright © The Philosophy of Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abbott, B. P., et al. 2016. “Observation of Gravitational Waves from a Binary Black Hole Merger.” Physical Review Letters 116:061102.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bartusiak, Marcia. 2000. Einstein’s Unfinished Symphony: Listening to the Sounds of Space-Time. Washington, DC: Henry.Google Scholar
Bogen, James, and Woodward, James. 1988. “Saving the Phenomena.” Philosophical Review 97 (3): 303–52..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bovens, Luc, and Hartmann, Stephan. 2003. Bayesian Epistemology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Collins, Harry. 2004. Gravity’s Shadow: The Search for Gravitational Waves. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cristelli, Matthieu. 2014. Complexity in Financial Markets: Modeling Psychological Behavior in Agent-Based Models and Order Book Models. Springer Theses: Recognizing Outstanding Ph.D. Research. Cham: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crupi, Vincenzo. 2015. “Confirmation.” In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, ed. Zalta, Edward N. Stanford, CA: Stanford University. http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2016/entries/confirmation/.Google Scholar
Glymour, Bruce. 2000. “Data and Phenomena: A Distinction Reconsidered.” Erkenntnis 52 (1): 29–37..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glymour, Clark. 1980. Theory and Evidence. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Hempel, Carl Gustav. 1943. “A Purely Syntactical Definition of Confirmation.” Journal of Symbolic Logic 8 (4): 122–43..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hempel, Carl Gustav 1945. “Studies in the Logic of Confirmation.” Mind 54:1–26 and 97–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hulse, Russel, and Taylor, Joseph. 1975. “Discovery of a Pulsar in a Binary System.” Astrophysical Journal 195:L51–L53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Machamer, Peter. 2011. “Phenomena, Data and Theories: A Special Issue of Synthese.” Synthese 182, no. 1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McAllister, James W. 1997. “Phenomena and Patterns in Data Sets.” Erkenntnis 47 (2): 217–28..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGrew, Timothy. 2003. “Confirmation, Heuristics, and Explanatory Reasoning.” British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 54 (4): 553–67..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Neapolitan, Richard E. 2003. Learning Bayesian Networks. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Pearl, Judea. 1988. Probabilistic Reasoning in Intelligent Systems: Networks of Plausible Inference. San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann.Google Scholar
Popper, Karl. 1935. Logik der Forschung. Vienna: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schupbach, Jonah N. 2011. “Comparing Probabilistic Measures of Explanatory Power.” Philosophy of Science 78 (5): 813–29..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schupbach, Jonah N., and Sprenger, Jan. 2011. “The Logic of Explanatory Power.” Philosophy of Science 78 (1): 105–27..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suppes, Patrick. 1960. “A Comparison of the Meaning and Uses of Models in Mathematics and the Empirical Sciences.” Synthese 12 (3): 287–301..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suppes, Patrick 1962. “Models of Data.” In Logic, Methodology and Philosophy of Science: Proceedings of the 1960 International Congress, ed. Nagel, E., Suppes, P., and Tarski, A., 252–61. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Weisberg, Joel M., Taylor, Joseph H., and Nice, David J. 2010. “Timing Measurements of the Relativistic Binary Pulsar PSR B1913+16.” Astrophysical Journal 722 (2): 1030.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woodward, James. 1989. “Data and Phenomena.” Synthese 79 (3): 393–472..CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woodward, James 2000. “Data, Phenomena, and Reliability.” Philosophy of Science 67 (Proceedings): S163–S179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar