On Sat, Oct 11, 2008 at 5:56 PM, Abram Demski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> I see your point --- it comes from the fact that "As are Bs" and "Bs >> are As" have the same positive evidence (both in NARS and in PLN), >> plus the additional assumption that "no positive evidence means >> negative evidence". Here the problem is in the additional assumption. >> Indeed it is assumed both in traditional logic and probability theory >> that "everything matters for every statement" (as revealed by Hempel's >> Paradox). > > Hmm... other additional assumptions will do the job here as well, and > I don't see why you mentioned the one you did. An assumption closer to > the argument I gave would be "The more negative evidence we've ween, > the less positive evidence we should expect".
Yes, for this topic, your assumption may be more proper, though it is still unjustified, unless it is further assumed that the number of total amount of evidence is fixed. Pei ------------------------------------------- agi Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/303/=now RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/303/ Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=8660244&id_secret=114414975-3c8e69 Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com
