经过实证主义和证伪主义之间的长期争论，对普遍假设的验证被对不确定的大前提的证实所取代。不幸的是，亨普尔提出了乌鸦悖论。然后，卡尔纳普使用逻辑概率的增量作为确认度量。到目前为止，已经提出了许多确认措施。其中Kemeny和Oppenheim提出的测度F具有Elles和Fitelson提出的对称性和不对称性、Greco等人提出的单调性以及许多研究者提出的归一化性质。基于语义信息论，从医学测试中推导出类似于F的测度b*。与似然比一样，测度 b* 和 F 只能指示通道或测试手段的质量，而不能指示概率预测的质量。此外，使用b*、F或其他测度来阐明乌鸦悖论仍然不容易。为此，导出了类似于正确率的测量c*。措施c*支持尼科德准则并破坏了等价条件，因此可用于消除乌鸦悖论。一个例子表明，措施F和b*有助于诊断新型冠状病毒感染，而大多数流行的确认措施则无济于事。另一个例子表明，所有流行的确认措施都不能用来解释黑乌鸦比一支粉笔更能确认“乌鸦是黑色的”。测度F、b*和c*表明较少反例的存在比较多正例的存在更重要，因此与波普尔的证伪思想相一致。
"点击查看英文标题和摘要"
Channels’ Confirmation and Predictions’ Confirmation: From the Medical Test to the Raven Paradox
After long arguments between positivism and falsificationism, the verification of universal hypotheses was replaced with the confirmation of uncertain major premises. Unfortunately, Hemple proposed the Raven Paradox. Then, Carnap used the increment of logical probability as the confirmation measure. So far, many confirmation measures have been proposed. Measure F proposed by Kemeny and Oppenheim among them possesses symmetries and asymmetries proposed by Elles and Fitelson, monotonicity proposed by Greco et al., and normalizing property suggested by many researchers. Based on the semantic information theory, a measure b* similar to F is derived from the medical test. Like the likelihood ratio, measures b* and F can only indicate the quality of channels or the testing means instead of the quality of probability predictions. Furthermore, it is still not easy to use b*, F, or another measure to clarify the Raven Paradox. For this reason, measure c* similar to the correct rate is derived. Measure c* supports the Nicod Criterion and undermines the Equivalence Condition, and hence, can be used to eliminate the Raven Paradox. An example indicates that measures F and b* are helpful for diagnosing the infection of Novel Coronavirus, whereas most popular confirmation measures are not. Another example reveals that all popular confirmation measures cannot be used to explain that a black raven can confirm “Ravens are black” more strongly than a piece of chalk. Measures F, b*, and c* indicate that the existence of fewer counterexamples is more important than more positive examples’ existence, and hence, are compatible with Popper’s falsification thought.
京公网安备 11010802027423号