2019
DOI: 10.1093/lpr/mgz017
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Dahlman and Mackor on coherence and probability in legal evidence: a commentary

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
1

Relationship

0
1

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 1 publication
(1 citation statement)
references
References 23 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Take the notion of coherence as an example. Epistemologists have given 'impossibility results' for coherence, that is, mathematical proofs that suggest that more coherent theories are not necessarily more probable than less coherent theories (e.g., Bovens & Hartmann, 2003;Olsson, 2005Olsson, , 2019. However, others have criticized these results.…”
Section: E Good Versus Probable Explanationsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Take the notion of coherence as an example. Epistemologists have given 'impossibility results' for coherence, that is, mathematical proofs that suggest that more coherent theories are not necessarily more probable than less coherent theories (e.g., Bovens & Hartmann, 2003;Olsson, 2005Olsson, , 2019. However, others have criticized these results.…”
Section: E Good Versus Probable Explanationsmentioning
confidence: 99%