Agora思想的公共广场

雅尼娜·霍西亚松-林登鲍姆

1899–1942

初步了解有意简化——人物介绍讲得更多

归纳可以理解为一种概率逻辑:证据在多大程度上提高一个假说的概率,就在多大程度上确证它——这解释了为什么一只黑乌鸦对“所有乌鸦都是黑的”的支持远大于一只白鞋,后者的支持微乎其微。

定位

分析哲学 · 东欧 · 认识论, 逻辑学, 科学

利沃夫-华沙学派的波兰哲学家,研究归纳与概率,1940年对确证悖论给出了概率论的回答;她在维尔纽斯附近被德国占领者杀害,很可能是在1942年。

核心思想

  • 归纳逻辑
  • 确证与概率
  • 对乌鸦悖论的回答
  • 主观概率

在星图中打开

影响

影响了 2

  • 鲁道夫·卡尔纳普

    影响了

    Carnap took up Hosiasson-Lindenbaum’s axioms for a degree of confirmation (‘On Confirmation’, 1940) in his inductive logic (Logical Foundations of Probability, 1950). R. Carnap, Logical Foundations of Probability (1950); J. Hosiasson-Lindenbaum, “On Confirmation”, Journal of Symbolic Logic 5 (1940)

    依据: AI 草稿

    鲁道夫·卡尔纳普 › 1891–1970

  • 卡尔·古斯塔夫·亨普尔

    影响了

    Hempel discussed Hosiasson-Lindenbaum’s probabilistic answer to the raven paradox, on which a non-black non-raven confirms only to a tiny degree (‘Studies in the Logic of Confirmation’, 1945). C. G. Hempel, “Studies in the Logic of Confirmation”, Mind 54 (1945); J. Hosiasson-Lindenbaum, “On Confirmation”, Journal of Symbolic Logic 5 (1940); SEP “Confirmation”

    依据: AI 草稿

    卡尔·古斯塔夫·亨普尔 › 1905–1997

作品

  • 发表于《符号逻辑杂志》:一种关于确证的概率理论,解释了为什么一只黑乌鸦比一只白鞋更能确证“所有乌鸦都是黑的”。

立场

Hosiasson-Lindenbaum belongs to the probabilistic line of the Lwów–Warsaw School. She treated induction not as a method of discovery but as a logic of degrees of belief: inductive inferences are justified to the extent that they can be described in the calculus of probability. In “On Confirmation” (1940) she gave axioms for a degree of confirmation and applied them to the paradox Carl Gustav Hempel had formulated: if “all ravens are black” is equivalent to “all non-black things are non-ravens”, a white shoe seems to confirm a hypothesis about ravens. Her answer – that, given far fewer ravens than non-black things, a black raven raises the probability of the hypothesis much more than a white shoe – became the core of the standard Bayesian reply. Hempel discussed it in 1945 and Rudolf Carnap took up her axioms in his “Logical Foundations of Probability” (1950). Later authors such as I. J. Good (1967) showed that the result depends on background assumptions, and that under some of them a black raven can even disconfirm the hypothesis. Her murder ended the work early; she was long known mainly through footnotes and has been rediscovered by recent research on the history of confirmation theory and on women in early analytic philosophy.

生平与背景

Janina Hosiasson was born in 1899 in Warsaw into a Jewish family. She studied philosophy at the University of Warsaw, where Tadeusz Kotarbiński and Jan Łukasiewicz were among her teachers, and earned her doctorate there. She married the logician Adolf Lindenbaum, a collaborator of Alfred Tarski. She never held a university chair and earned her living mainly as a teacher, while publishing in Polish, English and French: on why we prefer probabilities relative to many data (“Mind”, 1931), on whether probability theory is a generalised logic (1936), on confirmation (“Journal of Symbolic Logic”, 1940) and on induction and analogy (“Mind”, 1941). She took part in the international congresses of scientific philosophy in the 1930s and was in contact with members of the Vienna Circle. After the German invasion of Poland in 1939 she and Lindenbaum fled to Vilnius, then under Lithuanian and from 1940 Soviet rule. Lindenbaum was murdered in 1941. After the German occupation of the city Hosiasson-Lindenbaum was arrested and murdered by the Germans, probably in 1942 at Ponary (Paneriai) near Vilnius; the exact date is not documented.

其他主要作品

  • Why Do We Prefer Probabilities Relative to Many Data? (Mind, 1931)
  • Is the Theory of Probability a Generalised Logic? (La théorie des probabilités est-elle une logique généralisée?, 1936)
  • On Confirmation (Journal of Symbolic Logic, 1940)
  • Induction and Analogy (Induction et analogie: comparaison de leur fondement, Mind, 1941)

出现在

来源: Wikipedia · Wikidata

截至 2026年11月 · 来源 · 改进本页 · Agora 是如何制作的

在星图中打开