Philosophy Lexicon of Arguments

Search  
 
Author Item Excerpt Meta data

 
Books on Amazon
III 29f
Probability / Probability Laws / Armstrong: relative frequency does not have to depict the Probability Law - each occurring event itself may be unlikely - infinite sequences: here you can make the limit of relative frequencies - but no solution - Regularity Theory: must assume a Law fo Probability for each event: absurd - "indefinite improbability" / Lewis / Armstrong: the relative frequency wrongly maps the prblty law - distribution: No distib. is impossible, therefore therefore, the law seems to allow any - real Probability Law: here no property D through which the atom disintegrates when the property is present.
III 31
Probability Laws / Armstrong: cannot be identified with molecular facts of distributions - WProbability Laws are Natural Laws that do not logically supervene on facts.

AR II = Disp
D. M. Armstrong

In
Dispositions, Tim Crane, London New York 1996

AR III
D. Armstrong
What is a Law of Nature? Cambridge 1983


> Counter arguments against Armstrong



> Suggest your own contribution | > Suggest a correction | > Export as BibTeX Datei
 
Ed. Martin Schulz, access date 2017-05-27