Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-25T06:05:44.619Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Goldstick and O'Neill on “Truer Than”

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2022

Ilkka Niiniluoto*
Affiliation:
Department of Philosophy University of Helsinki
*
Send reprint requests to the author, Department of Philosophy, University of Helsinki, Unioninkatu 40 B, 00170 Helsinki, FINLAND.

Abstract

In a recent article, Goldstick and O'Neill propose a definition for the comparative “truer than” relation between rival propositions. This definition is studied here in a context where the concept of “convexity” is well defined for propositions. It turns out that the Goldstick-O'Neill definition gives a reasonable but very restricted sufficient condition for the “truer than” relation, but fails as a necessary condition.

Type
Discussion
Copyright
Copyright © 1991 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

Festa, R. (1987), “Theory of Similarity, Similarity of Theories, and Verismilitude”, in T. A. Kuipers (ed.), What is Closer-to-the-Truth? Amsterdam: Rodopi, pp. 145176.Google Scholar
Goldstick, D. and O'Neill, B. (1988), “‘Truer‘”, Philosophy of Science 55: 583597.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Niiniluoto, I. (1977), “On the Truthlikeness of Generalizations”, in R. E. Butts and J. Hintikka (eds.), The University of Western Ontario Series in Philosophy of Science. Vol. 11, Part 3, Basic Problems in Methodology and Linguistics. Dordrecht: Reidel, pp. 121147.Google Scholar
Niiniluoto, I. (1987), Truthlikeness. Dordrecht: Reidel.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oddie, G. (1986), Likeness to Truth. Dordrecht: Reidel.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oddie, G. (1987), “Truthlikeness and the Convexity of Propositions”, in T. A. Kuipers (ed.), What is Closer-to-the-Truth? Amsterdam: Rodopi, pp. 197216.Google Scholar