Why Explanatoriness Is Evidentially Relevant

Academic Article

Abstract

  • © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc and the Northern Institute of Philosophy William Roche and Elliott Sober argue that explanatoriness is evidentially irrelevant. This conclusion is surprising since it conflicts with a plausible assumption—the fact that a hypothesis best explains a given set of data is evidence that the hypothesis is true. We argue that Roche and Sober's screening-off argument fails to account for a key aspect of evidential strength: the weight of a body of evidence. The weight of a body of evidence affects the resiliency of probabilities in the light of new evidence. Thus, Roche and Sober are mistaken. Explanatoriness is evidentially relevant.
  • Authors

    Published In

    Digital Object Identifier (doi)

    Author List

  • McCain K; Poston T
  • Start Page

  • 145
  • End Page

  • 153
  • Volume

  • 3
  • Issue

  • 2