Advertisement

Correlation and Truth

  • Peter BrösselEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the The European Philosophy of Science Association Proceedings book series (EPSP, volume 2)

Abstract

The concept of correlation is the building block of almost any Bayesian attempt to capture or explicate any interesting aspect of scientific reasoning in terms of probabilities. This paper discusses one particularly simple correlation measure which is highly significant for almost any such attempt within the philosophy of science or epistemology. In particular, it shows how this correlation measure is related to central attempts to capture essential aspects of scientific reasoning such as confirmation, coherence, and the explanatory power of hypotheses. This intimate connection between correlation and scientific reasoning necessitates answering the question of how correlation and truth are related. This paper proposes an answer to this question and outlines its consequences for epistemology and the philosophy of science.

Keywords

Explanatory Power Correlation Measure Scientific Reasoning Coherence Measure Intimate Connection 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Bovens, L., & Hartmann, S. (2003). Bayesian epistemology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Bovens, L., & Olsson, E. (2000). Coherentism, reliability and bayesian networks. Mind, 109, 685–719.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brössel, P. (2008). Theory assessment and coherence. Abstracta, 4, 57–71.Google Scholar
  4. Carnap, R. (1950). The logical foundations of probability. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  5. Douven, I., & Meijs, W. (2007). Measuring coherence. Synthese, 156, 405–425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Fitelson, B. (2001). Studies in bayesian confirmation theory. PhD. Dissertation, University of Wisconsin-Madison (Philosophy).Google Scholar
  7. Fitelson, B. (2003). A probabilistic theory of coherence. Analysis, 63, 194–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gaifman, H., & Snir, M. (1982). Probabilities over rich languages, testing, and randomness. Journal of Symbolic Logic, 47, 495–548.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Good, I. J. (1960). Weight of evidence, corroboration, explanatory power, information and the utility of experiments. Journal of The Royal Statistical Society. Series B (Methodological), 22 319–331.Google Scholar
  10. Harman, G. (1965). The inference to the best explanation. The Philosophical Review, 74, 88–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hawthorne, J. (2011). Inductive logic. In Edward Zalta (Ed.), Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/logic-inductive/. Accessed 19 May 2012.
  12. Horwich, P. (1982). Probability and evidence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Huber, F. (2005). What is the point of confirmation? Philosophy of Science, 72, 1146–1159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Huber, F. (2008). Assessing theories, Bayes style. Synthese, 161, 89–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kemeny, J., & Oppenheim, P. (1952). Degree of factual support. Philosophy of Science, 19, 307–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Keynes, J. (1921). A treatise on probability. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  17. McGrew, T. (2003). Confirmation, heuristics, and explanatory reasoning. The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 54, 553–567.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Milne, P. (1996). \(log[p(h/eb)/p(h/b)]\) is the one true measure of confirmation. Philosophy of Science, 63, 21–26.Google Scholar
  19. Olsson, E. (2002). What is the problem of coherence and truth? The Journal of Philosophy, 99, 246–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Popper, K. (1959). The logic of scientific discovery. London: Hutchinson.Google Scholar
  21. Schervish, M., & Seidenfeld, T. (1990). An approach to consensus and certainty with increasing evidence. Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference, 25, 401–414.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Schupbach, J., (2009). New hope for Shogenji’s coherence measure. The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 62, 125–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Schupbach, J., & Sprenger, J. (2011). The logic of explanatory power. Philosophy of Science, 78, 105–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Siebel, M. (2004). On Fitelson’s measure of coherence. Analysis, 64, 189–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Shogenji, T. (1999). Is coherence truth conducive? Analysis, 59, 338–345.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Wayne, A. (1995). Bayesianism and diverse evidence. Philosophy of Science, 62, 111–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Wheeler, G. (2009). Focused correlation and confirmation. The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 60, 79–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PhilosophyUniversity of MainzMainzGermany

Personalised recommendations