Convergence to the Truth

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2410.11399v1
• Date: Tue, 15 Oct 2024 08:44:14 GMT
• Title: Convergence to the Truth
• Authors: Hanti Lin,
• Abstract summary: This article reviews and develops a tradition in philosophy of science, called convergentism, which holds that inference methods should be assessed in terms of their abilities to converge to the truth. This tradition is compared with three competing ones: (1) explanationism, which holds that theory choice should be guided by a theory's overall balance of explanatory virtues, such as simplicity and fit with data; (2) instrumentalism, according to which scientific inference should be driven by the goal of obtaining useful models, rather than true theories.
• Score: 0.0
• License:
• Abstract: This article reviews and develops an epistemological tradition in philosophy of science, called convergentism, which holds that inference methods should be assessed in terms of their abilities to converge to the truth. This tradition is compared with three competing ones: (1) explanationism, which holds that theory choice should be guided by a theory's overall balance of explanatory virtues, such as simplicity and fit with data; (2) instrumentalism, according to which scientific inference should be driven by the goal of obtaining useful models, rather than true theories; (3) Bayesianism, which features a shift of focus from all-or-nothing beliefs to degrees of belief.

Related papers

• Minimal operational theories: classical theories with quantum features [41.94295877935867]
  We introduce a class of probabilistic theories, where system dynamics are constrained to the minimal set of operations. Specifically, the allowed instruments are limited to those derived from compositions of preparations, measurements, swap transformations, and conditional tests. We demonstrate that minimal theories with conditioning and a spanning set of non-separable states satisfy two quantum no-go theorems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-08-02T16:24:09Z)
• Ontology of Belief Diversity: A Community-Based Epistemological Approach [44.99833362998488]
  We focus on developing a pragmatic ontology of belief systems, which is a complex and often controversial space. By iterating on our community-based design until mutual agreement is reached, we found that methods were best for categorizing the fundamental ways beliefs differ.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-07-25T09:02:50Z)
• Interpretability Needs a New Paradigm [49.134097841837715]
  Interpretability is the study of explaining models in understandable terms to humans. At the core of this debate is how each paradigm ensures its explanations are faithful, i.e., true to the model's behavior. This paper's position is that we should think about new paradigms while staying vigilant regarding faithfulness.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-08T19:31:06Z)
• Regularized Conventions: Equilibrium Computation as a Model of Pragmatic Reasoning [72.21876989058858]
  We present a model of pragmatic language understanding, where utterances are produced and understood by searching for regularized equilibria of signaling games. In this model speakers and listeners search for contextually appropriate utterance--meaning mappings that are both close to game-theoretically optimal conventions and close to a shared, ''default'' semantics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-16T09:42:36Z)
• Collapse Models: a theoretical, experimental and philosophical review [0.0]
  We show that a clarification of the ontological intimations of collapse models is needed for at least three reasons. We show that a clarification of the ontological intimations of collapse models is needed for at least three reasons.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-23T14:13:41Z)
• Quantum realism: axiomatization and quantification [77.34726150561087]
  We build an axiomatization for quantum realism -- a notion of realism compatible with quantum theory. We explicitly construct some classes of entropic quantifiers that are shown to satisfy almost all of the proposed axioms.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-10-10T18:08:42Z)
• The operational framework for quantum theories is both epistemologically and ontologically neutral [0.0]
  It is argued that there is no argument that could favour realist or antirealist attitudes towards quantum mechanics based solely on some features of some formalism. Both realist and antirealist views are well accomodable within operational formulations of the theory. This discussion aims at clarifying the limits of the historical and methodological affinities between scientific antirealism and operational physics.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-09-06T09:22:43Z)
• Formalising Concepts as Grounded Abstractions [68.24080871981869]
  This report shows how representation learning can be used to induce concepts from raw data. The main technical goal of this report is to show how techniques from representation learning can be married with a lattice-theoretic formulation of conceptual spaces.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-01-13T15:22:01Z)
• Unscrambling the omelette of causation and inference: The framework of causal-inferential theories [0.0]
  We introduce the notion of a causal-inferential theory using a process-theoretic formalism. Recasting the notions of operational and realist theories in this mold clarifies what a realist account of an experiment offers beyond an operational account. We argue that if one can identify axioms for a realist causal-inferential theory such that the notions of causation and inference can differ from their conventional (classical) interpretations, then one has the means of defining an intrinsically quantum notion of realism.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-09-07T17:58:22Z)
• Quantum epistemology and constructivism [0.0]
  We show that constructivism is compatible with both intuition and quantumal logic. This result is implied by the Frauchiger-Renner theorem, though it is independent importance as well.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-09-01T10:03:50Z)
• From Probability to Consilience: How Explanatory Values Implement Bayesian Reasoning [0.10152838128195464]
  We propose a Bayesian account of how explanatory values fit together to guide explanation. The resulting taxonomy provides a set of predictors for which explanations people prefer. This framework also enables us to reinterpret the explanatory vices that drive conspiracy theories, delusions, and extremist ideologies.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-06-03T16:11:45Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.