翻訳と辞書
Words near each other
・ "O" Is for Outlaw
・ "O"-Jung.Ban.Hap.
・ "Ode-to-Napoleon" hexachord
・ "Oh Yeah!" Live
・ "Our Contemporary" regional art exhibition (Leningrad, 1975)
・ "P" Is for Peril
・ "Pimpernel" Smith
・ "Polish death camp" controversy
・ "Pro knigi" ("About books")
・ "Prosopa" Greek Television Awards
・ "Pussy Cats" Starring the Walkmen
・ "Q" Is for Quarry
・ "R" Is for Ricochet
・ "R" The King (2016 film)
・ "Rags" Ragland
・ ! (album)
・ ! (disambiguation)
・ !!
・ !!!
・ !!! (album)
・ !!Destroy-Oh-Boy!!
・ !Action Pact!
・ !Arriba! La Pachanga
・ !Hero
・ !Hero (album)
・ !Kung language
・ !Oka Tokat
・ !PAUS3
・ !T.O.O.H.!
・ !Women Art Revolution


Dictionary Lists
翻訳と辞書 辞書検索 [ 開発暫定版 ]
スポンサード リンク

raven paradox : ウィキペディア英語版
raven paradox

The raven paradox, also known as Hempel's paradox or Hempel's ravens, is a paradox arising from the question of what constitutes evidence for a statement. Observing objects that are neither black nor ravens may formally increase the likelihood that all ravens are blackeven though, intuitively, these observations are unrelated.
This problem was proposed by the logician Carl Gustav Hempel in the 1940s to illustrate a contradiction between inductive logic and intuition.〔(Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy )〕
== The paradox ==

Hempel describes the paradox in terms of the hypothesis:
: (1) ''All ravens are black''.
In strict logical terms, via contraposition, this statement is equivalent to:
: (2) ''Everything that is not black is not a raven.''
It should be clear that in all circumstances where (2) is true, (1) is also true; and likewise, in all circumstances where (2) is false (i.e. if a world is imagined in which something that was not black, yet was a raven, existed), (1) is also false. This establishes logical equivalence.
Given a general statement such as ''all ravens are black'', a form of the same statement that refers to a specific observable instance of the general class would typically be considered to constitute evidence for that general statement. For example,
: (3) ''Nevermore, my pet raven, is black.''
is evidence supporting the hypothesis that ''all ravens are black''.
The paradox arises when this same process is applied to statement (2). On sighting a green apple, one can observe:
: (4) ''This green (and thus not black) thing is an apple (and thus not a raven).''
By the same reasoning, this statement is evidence that (2) ''everything that is not black is not a raven.'' But since (as above) this statement is logically equivalent to (1) ''all ravens are black'', it follows that the sight of a green apple is evidence supporting the notion that all ravens are black. This conclusion seems paradoxical, because it implies that information has been gained about ravens by looking at an apple.

抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア(Wikipedia)
ウィキペディアで「raven paradox」の詳細全文を読む



スポンサード リンク
翻訳と辞書 : 翻訳のためのインターネットリソース

Copyright(C) kotoba.ne.jp 1997-2016. All Rights Reserved.