Abstract
The recent theories of truthlikeness have not paid attention to the distinction between lawlike and accidental generalizations. L.J. Cohen has expressed this by saying that science aims at “legisimilitude” rather than “verisimilitude”. G. Oddie has given a reply to Cohen by defining the notion of legisimilitude in terms of higher-order logics. This paper gives a different reply to Cohen by treating laws as physically necessary generalizations and by defining the notion of legisimilitude as closeness to a suitably chosen lawlike sentence.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Bibliography
L. J. Cohen,What has science to do with truth?,Synthese 45 (1980), pp. 489–510.
L. J. Cohen,The factual component of science: The verisimilitude-legisimilitude duality, forthcoming inArchives de l'Institut International des Sciences Theorique (1981).
F. Dretske,Laws of nature,Philosophy of Science 44 (1977), pp. 248–268.
J. Hintikka,Logic, Language-Games and Information, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1973.
J. Hintikka, I. Niiniluoto, andE. Saarinnen (eds.),Essays on Mathematical and Philosophical Logic, Reidel, Dordrecht 1979.
S. Knuuttila (ed.),Reforging the Great Chain of Being, Reidel, Dordrecht, 1981.
D. Miller,The distance between constituents,Synthese 38 (1978), pp. 197–212.
D. Miller,Distance from the truth as a true distance, inHintikka et al. (1979), pp. 415–435.
I. Niiniluoto,On the truthlikeness of generalizations, inR. E. Butts andK. J. Hintikka (eds.),Basic Problems in Methodology and Linguistics, Reidel, Dordrecht, 1977, pp. 121–147.
I. Niiniluoto,Truthlikeness: comments on recent discussion,Synthese 38 (1978), p. 281–329. [1978a.]
I. Niiniluoto,Dretske on laws of nature,Philosophy of Science 45 (1978), pp. 431–439. [1978b.]
I. Niiniluoto,Truthlikeness in first-order languages, inHintikka et al. (1979), 437–458. [1979a.]
I. Niiniluoto,Degrees of truthlikeness: from singular sentences to generalizations,The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 30 (1979), pp. 371–376. [1979b.]
I. Niiniluoto,Scientific progress,Synthese 45 (1980), pp. 427–462.
I. Niiniluoto,On explicating verisimilitude: reply to Oddie, forthcoming inThe British Journal for the Philosophy of Science (1982).
G. Oddie,Verisimilitude and distance in logical space, inI. Niiniluoto andR. Tuomela (eds.),The Logic and Epistemology of Scientific Change, Acta Philosophica Fennica 30: 2–4, North-Holland, Amsterdam 1979, pp. 227–242.
G. Oddie,Verisimilitude reviewed,The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 32 (1981), pp. 237–265.
G. Oddie,Cohen on verisimilitude and natural necessity,Synthese 51 (1982), pp. 355–379.
V. Rantala,Aspects of Definability, Acta Philosophica Fennica 29: 2–3, North-Holland, Amsterdam 1977.
V. Rantala,Constituents, forthcoming inR. J. Bogdan (ed.),Jaakko Hintikka, Profiles, Reidel, Dordrecht 1983.
R. Rosenkrantz,Measuring truthlikeness,Synthese 45 (1980), pp. 463–487.
P. Tichý,On Popper's definition of verisimilitude,The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 25 (1974), pp. 155–160.
P. Tichý,Verisimilitude redefined,The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 27 (1976), pp. 25–42.
P. Tichý,Verisimilitude revisited,Synthese 38 (1978), pp. 175–196.
S. Uchii,Inductive logic with causal modalities: A probabilistic approach,Philosophy of Science 39 (1972), pp. 162–178.
S. Uchii,Inductive logic with causal modalities: A deterministic approach,Synthese 26 (1973), pp. 264–303.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Niiniluoto, I. Verisimilitude vs. legisimilitude. Stud Logica 42, 315–329 (1983). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01063850
Received:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01063850