Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T00:22:05.356Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Poverty of the Popperian Program for Truthlikeness

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2022

Graham Oddie
Graham Oddie*
Affiliation:
Philosophy Department, University of Otago
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The importance for realism of the concept of truthlikeness was first stressed by Popper. Popper himself not only mapped out a program for defining truth-likeness (in terms of falsity content and truth content) but produced the first definitions within this program. These were shown to be inadequate. But the program lingered on, and the most recent attempt to revive it is that of Newton-Smith. His attempt is a failure, not because of some minor defect or technical flaw in his particular account but rather because the program incorporates a fundamental flaw. However, realists need not despair. There already exists an entirely different program not subject to these criticisms.

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 53 , Issue 2 , June 1986 , pp. 163 - 178
Copyright
Copyright © The Philosophy of Science Association 1986

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

Miller, D. (1972), “The Truth-likeness of Truthlikeness”, Analysis 33: 50–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, D. (1974), “Popper's Qualitative Theory of Verisimilitude”, The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 25: 166–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, D. (1976), “Verisimilitude Redeflated”, The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 27: 363–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Newton-Smith, W. H. (1981), The Rationality of Science. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Niiniluoto, I. (1977), “On the Truthlikeness of Generalizations”, in Basic Problems in Methodology and Linguistics, Hintikka, J., Niiniluoto, I., and Saarinen, E., (eds.). Dordrecht: D. Reidel, pp. 437–58.Google Scholar
Oddie, G. J. (1979), “Verisimilitude and Distance in Logical Space”, Acta Philosophica Fennica 30 (2–4): 227–42.Google Scholar
Oddie, G. J. (1981), “Verisimilitude Reviewed”, The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 32: 237–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Popper, K. R. [1963] (1972), Conjectures and Refutations. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Popper, K. R. [1972] (1973), Objective Knowledge. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Tichý, P. (1974), “On Popper's Definitions of Verisimilitude”, The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 25: 155–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tichý, P. (1976), “Verisimilitude Redefined”, The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 27: 25–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tichý, P. (1978), “Verisimilitude Revisited”, Synthese 38: 175–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vetter, H. (1977), “A New Concept of Verisimilitude”, Theory and Decision 8: 369–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar