Abstract
I argue that so-called 'background knowledge' in confirmation theory has little, if anything, to do with 'knowledge' in the sense of mainstream epistemology. I argue that it is better construed as 'background information', which need not be believed in, justified, or true.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 137-149 |
| Number of pages | 13 |
| Journal | Logique et Analyse |
| Volume | 226 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 2014 |
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Information versus knowledge in confirmation theory'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver