402:). This contrasts with empty intentions, in which one refers to states of affairs through a certain opinion, but without an intuitive presentation. This is why evidence is often associated with the controversial thesis that it constitutes an immediate access to truth. In this sense, the evidently given phenomenon guarantees its own truth and is therefore considered indubitable. Due to this special epistemological status of evidence, it is regarded in phenomenology as the basic principle of all philosophy. In this form, it represents the lowest foundation of knowledge, which consists of indubitable insights upon which all subsequent knowledge is built. This evidence-based method is meant to make it possible for philosophy to overcome many of the traditionally unresolved disagreements and thus become a rigorous science. This far-reaching claim of phenomenology, based on absolute certainty, is one of the focal points of criticism by its opponents. Thus, it has been argued that even knowledge based on self-evident intuition is fallible. This can be seen, for example, in the fact that even among phenomenologists, there is much disagreement about the basic structures of experience.
371:. For example, Phoebe's auditory experience of the music justifies her belief that the speakers are on. Evidence has to be possessed by the believer in order to play this role. So Phoebe's own experiences can justify her own beliefs but not someone else's beliefs. Some philosophers hold that evidence possession is restricted to conscious mental states, for example, to sense data. This view has the implausible consequence that many of simple everyday-beliefs would be unjustified. The more common view is that all kinds of mental states, including stored beliefs that are currently unconscious, can act as evidence. It is sometimes argued that the possession of a mental state capable of justifying another is not sufficient for the justification to happen. The idea behind this line of thought is that justified belief has to be connected to or grounded in the mental state acting as its evidence. So Phoebe's belief that the speakers are on is not justified by her auditory experience if the belief is not based in this experience. This would be the case, for example, if Phoebe has both the experience and the belief but is unaware of the fact that the music is produced by the speakers.
597:
Instead, various auxiliary assumptions have to be included about the location of the smoke, the fire, the observer, the lighting conditions, the laws of chemistry, etc. In this way, the evidential relation becomes a three-place relation between evidence, hypothesis and auxiliary assumptions. This means that whether a thing is evidence for a hypothesis depends on the auxiliary assumptions one holds. This approach fits well with various scientific practices. For example, it is often the case that experimental scientists try to find evidence that would confirm or disconfirm a proposed theory. The hypothetico-deductive approach can be used to predict what should be observed in an experiment if the theory was true. It thereby explains the evidential relation between the experiment and the theory. One problem with this approach is that it cannot distinguish between relevant and certain irrelevant cases. So if smoke is evidence for the hypothesis "there is fire", then it is also evidence for conjunctions including this hypothesis, for example, "there is fire and
Socrates was wise", despite the fact that Socrates's wisdom is irrelevant here.
580:. In words: a piece of evidence (E) confirms a hypothesis (H) if the conditional probability of this hypothesis relative to the evidence is higher than the unconditional probability of the hypothesis by itself. Smoke (E), for example, is evidence that there is a fire (H), because the two usually occur together, which is why the likelihood of fire given that there is smoke is higher than the likelihood of fire by itself. On this view, evidence is akin to an indicator or a symptom of the truth of the hypothesis. Against this approach, it has been argued that it is too liberal because it allows accidental generalizations as evidence. Finding a nickel in one's pocket, for example, raises the probability of the hypothesis that "All the coins in my pockets are nickels". But, according to
277:
different scientists can share the same evidence. This leaves publicly observable phenomena like physical objects and events as the best candidates for evidence, unlike private mental states. One problem with these approaches is that the resulting definitions of evidence, both within a field and between fields, vary a lot and are incompatible with each other. For example, it is not clear what a bloody knife and a perceptual experience have in common when both are treated as evidence in different disciplines. This suggests that there is no unitary concept corresponding to the different theoretical roles ascribed to evidence, i.e. that we do not always mean the same thing when we talk of evidence.
375:
in "Robert believes that the corner shop sells milk". Such a view denies that sensory impressions can act as evidence. This is often held as an argument against this view since sensory impressions are commonly treated as evidence. Propositionalism is sometimes combined with the view that only attitudes to true propositions can count as evidence. On this view, the belief that the corner shop sells milk only constitutes evidence for the belief that the corner shop sells dairy products if the corner shop actually sells milk. Against this position, it has been argued that evidence can be misleading but still count as evidence.
877:
470:, i.e. that the evidence available supports competing theories equally well. So, for example, evidence from our everyday life about how gravity works confirms Newton's and Einstein's theory of gravitation equally well and is therefore unable to establish consensus among scientists. But in such cases, it is often the gradual accumulation of evidence that eventually leads to an emerging consensus. This evidence-driven process towards consensus seems to be one hallmark of the sciences not shared by other fields.
27:
262:. Reference to evidence is made in many different fields, like in science, in the legal system, in history, in journalism and in everyday discourse. A variety of different attempts have been made to conceptualize the nature of evidence. These attempts often proceed by starting with intuitions from one field or in relation to one theoretical role played by evidence and go on to generalize these intuitions, leading to a universal definition of evidence.
923:
359:, Earl Conee and Richard Feldman. Russell, Quine and the logical positivists belong to the empiricist tradition and hold that evidence consists in sense data, stimulation of one's sensory receptors and observation statements, respectively. According to Williamson, all and only knowledge constitute evidence. Conee and Feldman hold that only one's current mental states should be considered evidence.
958:
consequences. In law, certain policies allow (or require) evidence to be excluded from consideration based either on indicia relating to reliability, or broader social concerns. Testimony (which tells) and exhibits (which show) are the two main categories of evidence presented at a trial or hearing. In the United States, evidence in federal court is admitted or excluded under the
1048:, there is an implicit burden of proof on the party asserting a claim, since the default position is generally one of neutrality or unbelief. Each party in a debate will therefore carry the burden of proof for any assertion they make in the argument, although some assertions may be granted by the other party without further evidence. If the debate is set up as a
478:. Some cases of theory-ladenness are relatively uncontroversial, for example, that the numbers output by a measurement device need additional assumptions about how this device works and what was measured in order to count as meaningful evidence. Other putative cases are more controversial, for example, the idea that different people or cultures perceive the
423:. The term "confirmation" is sometimes used synonymously with that of "evidential support". Measurements of Mercury's "anomalous" orbit, for example, are seen as evidence that confirms Einstein's theory of general relativity. This is especially relevant for choosing between competing theories. So in the case above, evidence plays the role of
604:, an observation sentence is evidence for a universal hypothesis if the sentence describes a positive instance of this hypothesis. For example, the observation that "this swan is white" is an instance of the universal hypothesis that "all swans are white". This approach can be given a precise formulation in
450:, i.e. that we come first to possess the evidence and later form the hypothesis through induction. But this temporal order is not always reflected in scientific practice, where experimental researchers may look for a specific piece of evidence in order to confirm or disconfirm a pre-existing hypothesis.
848:
The burden of proof is on the person making a contentious claim. Within science, this translates to the burden resting on presenters of a paper, in which the presenters argue for their specific findings. This paper is placed before a panel of judges where the presenter must defend the thesis against
374:
It is sometimes held that only propositional mental states can play this role, a position known as "propositionalism". A mental state is propositional if it is an attitude directed at a propositional content. Such attitudes are usually expressed by verbs like "believe" together with a that-clause, as
183:
consequences of the hypothesis. The positive-instance approach states that an observation sentence is evidence for a universal hypothesis if the sentence describes a positive instance of this hypothesis. The evidential relation can occur in various degrees of strength. These degrees range from direct
984:
is the obligation of a party in an argument or dispute to provide sufficient evidence to shift the other party's or a third party's belief from their initial position. The burden of proof must be fulfilled by both establishing confirming evidence and negating oppositional evidence. Conclusions drawn
276:
someone is, is determined by how they respond to evidence. Another intuition, which is more dominant in the philosophy of science, focuses on evidence as that which confirms scientific hypotheses and arbitrates between competing theories. On this view, it is essential that evidence is public so that
253:
is what supports this proposition. Traditionally, the term is sometimes understood in a narrower sense: as the intuitive knowledge of facts that are considered indubitable. In this sense, only the singular form is used. This meaning is found especially in phenomenology, in which evidence is elevated
596:
consequence of that hypothesis". One problem with the characterization so far is that hypotheses usually contain relatively little information and therefore have few if any deductive observational consequences. So the hypothesis by itself that there is a fire does not entail that smoke is observed.
493:
to emerge since the different parties may be unable to agree even on what the evidence is. When understood in the widest sense, it is not controversial that some form of theory-ladenness exists. But it is questionable whether it constitutes a serious threat to scientific evidence when understood in
285:
On the other hand, Aristotle, phenomenologists, and numerous scholars accept that there could be several degrees of evidence. For instance, while the outcome of a complex equation may become more or less evident to a mathematician after hours of deduction, yet with little doubts about it, a simpler
75:
attitude. For example, a perceptual experience of a tree may act as evidence that justifies the belief that there is a tree. In this role, evidence is usually understood as a private mental state. Important topics in this field include the questions of what the nature of these mental states is, for
902:
is that which a court receives and considers for the purposes of deciding a particular case. Two primary burden-of-proof considerations exist in law. The first is on whom the burden rests. In many, especially
Western, courts, the burden of proof is placed on the prosecution in criminal cases and
386:
to believe that he was living in the 20th century because of all the evidence supporting his belief despite the fact that this evidence was misleading since it was part of a simulated reality. This account of evidence and rationality can also be extended to other doxastic attitudes, like disbelief
458:
in nature, i.e. that the meanings of the theoretical terms used in the hypothesis are determined by what would count as evidence for them. Counterexamples for this view come from the fact that our idea of what counts as evidence may change while the meanings of the corresponding theoretical terms
505:
in the 20th century started to investigate the "evidential relation", the relation between evidence and the proposition supported by it. The issue of the nature of the evidential relation concerns the question of what this relation has to be like in order for one thing to justify a belief or to
957:
Presenting evidence before the court differs from the gathering of evidence in important ways. Gathering evidence may take many forms; presenting evidence that tends to prove or disprove the point at issue is strictly governed by rules. Failure to follow these rules leads to any number of
608:: a proposition is evidence for a hypothesis if it entails the "development of the hypothesis". Intuitively, the development of the hypothesis is what the hypothesis states if it was restricted to only the individuals mentioned in the evidence. In the case above, we have the hypothesis "
489:, leading them to very different impressions about what is the case and what evidence is available. Theory-ladenness threatens to impede the role of evidence as neutral arbiter since these additional assumptions may favor some theories over others. It could thereby also undermine a
83:, evidence is understood in a similar sense. Here, however, it is limited to intuitive knowledge that provides immediate access to truth and is therefore indubitable. In this role, it is supposed to provide ultimate justifications for basic philosophical principles and thus turn
387:
and suspension of belief. So rationality does not just demand that we believe something if we have decisive evidence for it, it also demands that we disbelieve something if we have decisive evidence against it and that we suspend belief if we lack decisive evidence either way.
175:, this is referred to as the "evidential relation" and there are competing theories about what this relation has to be like. Probabilistic approaches hold that something counts as evidence if it increases the probability of the supported hypothesis. According to
254:
to one of the basic principles of philosophy, giving philosophy the ultimate justifications that are supposed to turn it into a rigorous science. In a more modern usage, the plural form is also used. In academic discourse, evidence plays a central role in
903:
the plaintiff in civil cases. The second consideration is the degree of certitude proof must reach, depending on both the quantity and quality of evidence. These degrees are different for criminal and civil cases, the former requiring evidence beyond a
473:
Another problem for the conception of evidence in terms of confirmation of hypotheses is that what some scientists consider the evidence to be may already involve various theoretical assumptions not shared by other scientists. This phenomenon is known as
2220:
395:
The meaning of the term "evidence" in phenomenology shows many parallels to its epistemological usage, but it is understood in a narrower sense. Thus, evidence here specifically refers to intuitive knowledge, which is described as "self-given"
303:
The simplest truths are the most evident. They are self-explanatory and do not require argumentation to be understood by the intellect. However, for those lacking education, certain complex truths require rational discourse to become
530:, explain the evidential relation in terms of probabilities. They hold that all that is necessary is that the existence of the evidence increases the likelihood that the hypothesis is true. This can be expressed mathematically as
272:. This line of thought is usually followed in epistemology and tends to explain evidence in terms of private mental states, for example, as experiences, other beliefs or knowledge. This is closely related to the idea that how
289:
Riofrio has detected some characteristics that are present in evident arguments and proofs. The more they are evident, the more these characteristics will be present. There are six intrinsic characteristics of evidence:
950:. In a criminal case, this path must be clearly documented or attested to by those who handled the evidence. If the chain of evidence is broken, a defendant may be able to persuade the judge to declare the evidence
2194:
1030:
carries the burden of proof and must convince a judge or jury that the preponderance of the evidence is on their side. Other legal standards of proof include "reasonable suspicion", "probable cause" (as for
811:" above. But many scientific theories posit theoretical objects, like electrons or strings in physics, that are not directly observable and therefore cannot show up in the evidence as conceived here.
139:, i.e. that what some scientists consider the evidence to be may already involve various theoretical assumptions not shared by other scientists. It is often held that there are two kinds of evidence:
750:" (this swan is white). One important shortcoming of this approach is that it requires that the hypothesis and the evidence are formulated in the same vocabulary, i.e. use the same predicates, like "
683:
220:. The parts of a legal case that are not in controversy are known, in general, as the "facts of the case." Beyond any facts that are undisputed, a judge or jury is usually tasked with being a
592:
is a non-probabilistic approach that characterizes the evidential relations in terms of deductive consequences of the hypothesis. According to this view, "evidence for a hypothesis is a true
321:
Initially, evident truths are perceived as natural and effortless, as
Aristotle highlighted. They are innately present within the intellect, fostering a peaceful and harmonious understanding.
1234:
748:
578:
463:
in nature, i.e. that our belief in a hypothesis is justified based on the evidence while the justification for the belief in the evidence does not depend on the hypothesis.
911:, or whether the proposition is more likely true or false. The decision-maker, often a jury, but sometimes a judge decides whether the burden of proof has been fulfilled.
307:
Evident truths do not need justification; they are indubitable. They are intuitively grasped by the intellect, without the need for further discourse, arguments, or proof.
236:) must be more compelling than in other situations (e.g. minor civil disputes), which drastically affects the quality and quantity of evidence necessary to decide a case.
934:
In a criminal investigation, rather than attempting to prove an abstract or hypothetical point, the evidence gatherers attempt to determine who is responsible for a
1813:"Rafael CORAZĂN GONZĂLEZ, FilosofĂa del conocimiento, Eunsa («IniciaciĂłn FilosĂłfica », 21), Pamplona 2002, 212 pp., 17 x 24, ISBN 84-313-2001-X | WorldCat.org"
1184:
1159:
809:
382:
for us to believe. But it can be rational to have a false belief. This is the case when we possess misleading evidence. For example, it was rational for Neo in the
777:
127:, like observable physical objects or events, so that the proponents of the different theories can agree on what the evidence is. This is ensured by following the
999:
The latter question depends on the nature of the point under contention and determines the quantity and quality of evidence required to meet the burden of proof.
297:
What is evident aligns coherently with other truths acquired through knowledge. Any insurmountable incoherence would indicate the presence of error or falsehood.
131:
and tends to lead to an emerging scientific consensus through the gradual accumulation of evidence. Two issues for the scientific conception of evidence are the
2997:
2017:
685:" (all swans are white) which, when restricted to the domain "{a}", containing only the one individual mentioned in the evidence, entails the evidence, i.e. "
2967:
584:, it should not be considered evidence for this hypothesis since there is no lawful connection between this one nickel and the other coins in the pocket.
3187:
2092:
2061:
435:
so that proponents of competing scientific theories agree on what evidence is available. These requirements suggest scientific evidence consists not of
3682:
483:
4003:
3779:
1926:
2445:
2037:
1944:
1450:
1345:
3275:
825:
In scientific research evidence is accumulated through observations of phenomena that occur in the natural world, or which are created as
2948:
2936:
2922:
324:
Consequently, evident truths appear to be widely shared, strongly connected to common sense, which comprises generally accepted beliefs.
192:
of a hypothesis to weak evidence that is merely consistent with the hypothesis but does not rule out other, competing hypotheses, as in
2146:
4208:
3963:
3947:
3803:
2990:
852:
When evidence is contradictory to predicted expectations, the evidence and the ways of making it are often closely scrutinized (see
318:
The evident instills certainty and grants the knower a subjective sense of security, as they believe to have aligned with the truth
294:
The truth lies in what is evident, while falsehood or irrationality, although it may appear evident at times, lacks true evidence.
3955:
3343:
2490:"The Incommensurability of Scientific Theories: 2.2.2 Conceptual replacement and theory-ladenness of observation: Ludwik Fleck"
3819:
1378:
611:
4027:
3363:
2874:
1169:
1052:
to be supported by one side and refuted by another, the overall burden of proof is on the side supporting the resolution.
946:
The path that physical evidence takes from the scene of a crime or the arrest of a suspect to the courtroom is called the
327:
Evident truths are fertile ground: they provide a solid foundation for other branches of scientific knowledge to flourish.
314:
In addition, four subjective or external characteristics can be detected over those things that are more or less evident:
164:, tend to emphasize more the public nature of evidence (for example, scientists tend to focus on how the data used during
3811:
3697:
3409:
2983:
1239:
876:
266:
116:
61:
914:
After deciding who will carry the burden of proof, the evidence is first gathered and then presented before the court:
119:. In order to play the role of neutral arbiter between competing theories, it is important that scientific evidence is
4011:
3843:
3660:
1134:
975:
588:
512:
446:
It is often held that evidence is in some sense prior to the hypotheses it confirms. This was sometimes understood as
378:
This line of thought is often combined with the idea that evidence, propositional or otherwise, determines what it is
176:
938:
act. The focus of criminal evidence is to connect physical evidence and reports of witnesses to a specific person.
860:
of the hypothesis'. The rules for evidence used by science are collected systematically in an attempt to avoid the
76:
example, whether they have to be propositional, and whether misleading mental states can still qualify as evidence.
3971:
3867:
3851:
3835:
3635:
1204:
1154:
80:
4051:
3603:
3588:
1209:
1164:
1129:
959:
908:
853:
20:
4140:
3987:
3704:
3598:
3593:
3268:
2612:
1149:
1139:
1015:
2668:
2427:
2084:
2053:
49:
is what supports the proposition. It is usually understood as an indication that the supported proposition is
2175:
4114:
3827:
3630:
3608:
3353:
3207:
2378:
1259:
1199:
1189:
1174:
348:
193:
171:
In order for something to act as evidence for a hypothesis, it has to stand in the right relation to it. In
688:
87:
into a rigorous science. However, it is highly controversial whether evidence can meet these requirements.
3538:
3504:
3027:
1179:
4035:
3655:
3640:
3544:
3242:
1219:
1194:
1144:
1076:
971:
895:
834:
533:
527:
259:
229:
165:
91:
985:
from evidence may be subject to criticism based on a perceived failure to fulfill the burden of proof.
427:
between Newton's and
Einstein's theory of gravitation. This is only possible if scientific evidence is
367:
The guiding intuition within epistemology concerning the role of evidence is that it is what justifies
26:
4043:
3714:
3677:
3578:
3573:
3509:
3368:
213:
2722:
2352:
4182:
4019:
3467:
3450:
3404:
3394:
3261:
3179:
3006:
2412:
1081:
1066:
951:
899:
838:
820:
451:
352:
205:
4104:
2693:
2029:
1842:
1430:
4094:
3895:
3771:
3645:
3566:
3530:
3338:
3070:
2853:
2828:
2789:
2750:
2566:
2462:
2333:
1981:
1872:
1487:
1319:
1229:
1224:
1124:
1003:
865:
467:
356:
149:
132:
1754:
Objectivity and
Subjectivity in Epistemology: A Defense of the Phenomenal Conception of Evidence
4203:
4069:
3910:
3885:
3761:
3102:
3087:
3014:
2956:
E141 Standard
Practice for Acceptance of Evidence Based on the Results of Probability Sampling
2742:
2441:
2033:
1940:
1864:
1479:
1446:
1341:
1311:
1071:
856:) and only at the end of this process is the hypothesis rejected: this can be referred to as '
605:
412:
225:
128:
96:
2516:
1041:
evidence", "credible evidence", "substantial evidence", and "clear and convincing evidence".
894:
In law, the production and presentation of evidence depend first on establishing on whom the
4074:
3995:
3979:
3905:
3859:
3424:
3333:
3232:
3124:
2820:
2781:
2734:
2585:
2558:
2433:
2325:
2258:
2127:
2025:
1973:
1932:
1854:
1438:
1303:
1264:
1061:
1049:
1019:
947:
922:
904:
490:
475:
344:
136:
782:
4089:
4084:
3665:
3620:
3455:
3429:
3373:
3217:
3066:
2913:
1023:
753:
2489:
2961:
2847:
2176:"Cartesianische Meditationen: § 24. Evidenz als Selbstgegebenheit und ihre Abwandlungen"
1358:
38:
provide evidence regarding the aircraft's flight path as well as the weather conditions.
3751:
3692:
3525:
3460:
3445:
3348:
3019:
2131:
1291:
1214:
1091:
889:
383:
201:
4197:
3930:
3925:
3900:
3709:
3650:
3561:
3489:
3419:
3414:
2832:
2793:
2754:
2570:
1876:
1633:
1405:
1244:
1114:
833:
or other controlled conditions. Scientists tend to focus on how the data used during
581:
233:
221:
217:
185:
2337:
1985:
1323:
335:
to detect the level of certainty or evidence that one argument or proof could have.
135:, i.e. that the available evidence may support competing theories equally well, and
3785:
3583:
3514:
3474:
3302:
3212:
3197:
2824:
1786:
1694:
881:
255:
144:
57:
2437:
2221:"Historisches Wörterbuch der Philosophie online: Selbstgebung, Selbstgegebenheit"
1894:
1384:
4109:
4099:
4079:
3499:
3479:
3389:
3312:
3192:
3082:
3052:
2613:"The objective Bayesian conceptualisation of proof and reference class problems"
1936:
1442:
1037:
593:
502:
250:
180:
46:
2917:
2878:
2262:
1751:
Gage, Logan Paul (2014). "1. Introduction: Two Rival
Conceptions of Evidence".
1606:
53:. What role evidence plays and how it is conceived varies from field to field.
3920:
3915:
3890:
3670:
3494:
3358:
3307:
3284:
3237:
3227:
3134:
3109:
3062:
2907:
2562:
2329:
1977:
1254:
1119:
1007:
857:
842:
830:
826:
420:
172:
104:
84:
2746:
1868:
1483:
1315:
930:
Evidence
Response Team gathering evidence by dusting an area for fingerprints
4161:
4147:
4135:
4119:
3687:
3625:
3484:
3317:
3169:
3149:
3057:
3032:
1812:
1086:
1027:
1011:
331:
These ten characteristics of what is evident allowed
Riofrio to formulate a
209:
72:
884:
can be seen as representing the weighing of evidence in a legal proceeding.
2738:
1859:
3222:
3202:
3154:
3139:
3037:
2944:
2903:
1104:
486:
379:
273:
112:
68:
31:
2147:"The Architecture of Reason: The Structure and Substance of Rationality"
1491:
1467:
3129:
3119:
3114:
3097:
368:
269:
157:
64:
35:
2975:
2808:
2002:
The
Architecture of Reason: The Structure and Substance of Rationality
2000:
224:
for the other issues of a case. Evidence and rules are used to decide
4145:
3615:
3164:
3159:
3144:
3042:
1249:
1109:
1045:
1032:
2769:
2546:
2294:
2277:
2246:
2115:
1961:
1752:
1292:"Experimental Practice and an Error Statistical Account of Evidence"
2785:
2313:
1307:
506:
confirm a hypothesis. Important theories in this field include the
4154:
2931:
2404:
1677:
1409:
935:
921:
875:
479:
459:
remain constant. The most plausible view is that this priority is
189:
108:
50:
25:
466:
A central issue for the scientific conception of evidence is the
3092:
3047:
2953:
2723:"Interpretation and the Hypothetico-Deductive Method: A Dilemma"
2643:
1721:
1537:
861:
3731:
3257:
2979:
2960:
2195:"Historisches Wörterbuch der Philosophie online: Leerintention"
927:
197:
161:
3253:
2770:"Beyond Bootstrapping: A New Account of Evidential Relevance"
2409:
A Metaphysician's User Guide: The Epistemology of Metaphysics
310:
Evident truths are clear, translucent, and filled with light.
995:
To what degree of certitude must the assertion be supported?
1336:
American College of Forensic Examiners Institute. (2016).
1235:
National Registry of Evidence-Based Programs and Practices
228:
that are disputed, some of which may be determined by the
2426:
Andersen, Hanne; Green, Sara (2013). "Theory-Ladenness".
1468:"Das PhÀnomen der Evidenz und die Evidenz des PhÀnomens"
208:
in a legal proceeding. Types of legal evidence include
2405:"IV. Metaphysical Beliefs and Persisting Disagreement"
1843:"Evidence and its Proof: Designing a Test of Evidence"
678:{\displaystyle \forall x(swan(x)\rightarrow white(x))}
232:
relevant to the case. Evidence in certain cases (e.g.
1338:
The Certified Criminal Investigator Body of Knowledge
785:
756:
691:
614:
536:
2547:"Confirmation of Scientific Hypotheses as Relations"
1414:, in: Wörterbuch der philosophischen Begriffe, 1904.
1340:. Boca Raton, Florida: CRC Press. pp. 112â113.
4128:
4062:
3939:
3878:
3795:
3742:
3554:
3523:
3438:
3382:
3326:
3295:
3178:
3013:
2295:"Was HeiĂt "Philosophie Als Strenge Wissenschaft"?"
1676:Conee, Earl; Feldman, Richard (2008). "Evidence".
1437:(in German). Springer Netherlands. pp. 1â53.
803:
771:
742:
677:
572:
111:, for example, are seen as evidence that confirms
2849:A Digest of the Law of Evidence in Criminal Cases
1962:"Evidentialism and the Problem of Stored Beliefs"
1380:EnzyklopÀdie Philosophie und Wissenschaftstheorie
907:, the latter considering only which side has the
265:One important intuition is that evidence is what
249:Understood in its broadest sense, evidence for a
454:, on the other hand, held that this priority is
410:In the sciences, evidence is understood as what
300:Evident truths are based on necessary reasoning.
2592:. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University
2523:. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University
2496:. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University
2469:. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University
2359:. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University
2018:"In Defense of Propositionalism about Evidence"
1901:. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University
1793:. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University
1701:. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University
1640:. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University
1613:. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University
1185:Evidence-based pharmacy in developing countries
1160:Evidence-based library and information practice
841:usually goes towards supporting or rejecting a
3780:Fourth Great Debate in international relations
2488:Oberheim, Eric; Hoyningen-Huene, Paul (2018).
2054:"Philosophy of mind - Propositional attitudes"
3269:
2991:
2024:. Oxford University Press. pp. 226â232.
1920:
1918:
1916:
1372:
1370:
8:
4159:
3769:
3759:
3749:
3465:
2379:"Philosophy of science - Underdetermination"
397:
1431:"Der RĂŒckgang auf das Welterfahrende Leben"
286:formula would appear more evident to them.
153:or evidence accessible through the senses.
3739:
3728:
3292:
3276:
3262:
3254:
2998:
2984:
2976:
2809:"The Objective Confirmation of Hypotheses"
2169:
2167:
3683:Relationship between religion and science
2877:. Federal Evidence Review. Archived from
2551:Journal for General Philosophy of Science
2353:"Underdetermination of Scientific Theory"
2030:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199563500.003.0015
1888:
1886:
1858:
1531:
1529:
1527:
1525:
1523:
1521:
1357:SandkĂŒhler, Hans Jörg (2010). "Evidenz".
1285:
1283:
1281:
880:The balance scales seen in depictions of
784:
755:
690:
613:
535:
2716:
2714:
2540:
2538:
2318:Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences
2120:Philosophy and Phenomenological Research
1780:
1778:
1776:
1774:
1772:
1770:
1768:
1766:
1764:
1671:
1669:
1667:
1665:
1663:
1661:
1659:
1657:
1655:
1600:
1598:
1596:
1594:
1592:
1590:
1588:
1586:
1584:
1582:
1580:
1578:
1519:
1517:
1515:
1513:
1511:
1509:
1507:
1505:
1503:
1501:
343:Important theorists of evidence include
107:. Measurements of Mercury's "anomalous"
4004:The Structure of Scientific Revolutions
2590:The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
2521:The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
2494:The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
2467:The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
2461:Boyd, Nora Mills; Bogen, James (2021).
2357:The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
1899:The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
1791:The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
1746:
1744:
1742:
1699:The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
1638:The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
1611:The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
1576:
1574:
1572:
1570:
1568:
1566:
1564:
1562:
1560:
1558:
1424:
1422:
1420:
1377:MittelstraĂ, JĂŒrgen (2005). "Evidenz".
1277:
1006:in the United States, for example, the
94:, evidence is understood as that which
3359:Machian positivism (empirio-criticism)
2116:"Précis of the Architecture of Reason"
2005:. Oxford University Press. p. 19.
1010:carries the burden of proof since the
992:On whom does the burden of proof rest?
204:govern the types of evidence that are
2515:Reiss, Julian; Sprenger, Jan (2020).
1836:
1834:
1290:Mayo, Deborah G. (1 September 2000).
743:{\displaystyle swan(a)\land white(a)}
7:
2314:"The Critique of Pure Phenomenology"
2279:Philosophie Als Strenge Wissenschaft
2949:Indiana Philosophy Ontology Project
2937:Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy
2923:Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
2648:Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy
2463:"Theory and Observation in Science"
1726:Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy
1693:Steup, Matthias; Neta, Ram (2020).
1542:Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy
3636:Nomotheticâidiographic distinction
2846:Roscoe, H.; Granger, T.C. (1840).
2301:. Königshausen & Neumann: 199.
2132:10.1111/j.1933-1592.2003.tb00031.x
988:Two principal considerations are:
615:
573:{\displaystyle P(H\mid E)>P(H)}
14:
3964:The Logic of Scientific Discovery
3948:Materialism and Empirio-criticism
3804:The Course in Positive Philosophy
2721:Folde, Christian (1 March 2016).
2095:from the original on 4 March 2021
2064:from the original on 19 July 2020
2022:Evidentialism and its Discontents
498:Nature of the evidential relation
441:public physical objects or events
2875:"Federal Rules of Evidence 2008"
2432:. Springer. pp. 2165â2167.
2299:Wege zur Politischen Philosophie
2151:Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews
1757:(PhD Thesis). Baylor University.
339:Different approaches to evidence
16:Material supporting an assertion
3956:History and Class Consciousness
2429:Encyclopedia of Systems Biology
2247:"Phanomenologien der Erfahrung"
1634:"The Legal Concept of Evidence"
815:Empirical evidence (in science)
3820:Critical History of Philosophy
2825:10.1080/00455091.1981.10716311
2813:Canadian Journal of Philosophy
2694:"hypothetico-deductive method"
2669:"hypothetico-deductive method"
2403:Lee, James Soo (August 2017).
737:
731:
710:
704:
672:
669:
663:
645:
642:
636:
621:
567:
561:
552:
540:
1:
4028:Knowledge and Human Interests
3364:Rankean historical positivism
2145:Audi, Robert (9 March 2002).
1841:Riofrio, Juan Carlos (2019).
1472:PhÀnomenologische Forschungen
1170:Evidence-based medical ethics
468:problem of underdetermination
133:problem of underdetermination
4146:
3812:A General View of Positivism
2644:"Confirmation and Induction"
2438:10.1007/978-1-4419-9863-7_86
2411:(PhD thesis). Syracuse, NY:
1925:Williamson, Timothy (2002).
1240:Policy-based evidence making
528:Bayesian confirmation theory
156:Other fields, including the
117:theory of general relativity
4012:Conjectures and Refutations
3844:The Logic of Modern Physics
3661:Deductive-nomological model
1937:10.1093/019925656X.001.0001
1931:. Oxford University Press.
1443:10.1007/978-94-011-9616-1_1
1135:Evidence-based conservation
976:Philosophic burden of proof
4225:
3972:The Poverty of Historicism
3868:The Universe in a Nutshell
3852:Language, Truth, and Logic
3836:The Analysis of Sensations
2727:Journal of Literary Theory
2263:10.1628/003181510791058920
1682:. Oxford University Press.
1205:Evidence-based prosecution
1155:Evidence-based legislation
1056:Specific types of evidence
969:
887:
818:
602:positive-instance approach
518:positive-instance approach
18:
4180:
4052:The Rhetoric of Economics
3738:
3733:Positivist-related debate
3727:
3291:
3125:Parsimony (Occam's razor)
2584:Talbott, William (2016).
2563:10.1007/s10838-006-1065-0
2330:10.1007/s11097-006-9043-x
2245:Luckner, Andreas (2010).
2085:"Propositional attitudes"
2016:Dougherty, Trent (2011).
1978:10.1007/s11098-008-9233-1
1383:. Metzler. Archived from
1210:Evidence-based toxicology
1165:Evidence-based management
1130:Evidence-based assessment
1020:beyond a reasonable doubt
960:Federal Rules of Evidence
909:preponderance of evidence
21:Evidence (disambiguation)
4209:Concepts in epistemology
3988:Two Dogmas of Empiricism
3705:Structural functionalism
3631:Naturalism in literature
2807:Stemmer, Nathan (1981).
2768:Culler, Madison (1995).
2611:Franklin, James (2011).
2517:"Scientific Objectivity"
2276:Husserl, Edmund (1965).
2251:Philosophische Rundschau
1960:Piazza, Tommaso (2009).
1893:Huemer, Michael (2019).
1785:Crupi, Vincenzo (2021).
1679:Epistemology: New Essays
1360:EnzyklopÀdie Philosophie
1150:Evidence-based education
1140:Evidence-based dentistry
524:Probabilistic approaches
406:In philosophy of science
4115:Willard Van Orman Quine
3828:Idealism and Positivism
3420:Critique of metaphysics
3354:Sociological positivism
2968:EncyclopĂŠdia Britannica
2698:Encyclopedia Britannica
2586:"Bayesian Epistemology"
2383:Encyclopedia Britannica
2351:Stanford, Kyle (2017).
2058:Encyclopedia Britannica
1466:Stenger, Georg (1996).
1260:Theory of justification
1200:Evidence-based practice
1190:Evidence-based policing
1175:Evidence-based medicine
589:Hypothetico-deductivism
513:hypothetico-deductivism
349:Willard Van Orman Quine
194:circumstantial evidence
179:, evidence consists in
177:hypothetico-deductivism
4160:
4129:Concepts in contention
3770:
3760:
3750:
3641:Objectivity in science
3539:Non-Euclidean geometry
3505:Methodological dualism
3466:
2971:(11th ed.). 1911.
2293:Diehl, Ulrich (2005).
2282:. Felix Meiner Verlag.
1605:Kelly, Thomas (2016).
1180:Evidence-based nursing
931:
885:
854:experimenter's regress
805:
773:
744:
679:
574:
526:, also referred to as
508:probabilistic approach
398:
39:
4036:The Poverty of Theory
3656:Philosophy of science
3545:Uncertainty principle
3180:Theories of deduction
2774:Philosophy of Science
2739:10.1515/jlt-2016-0003
2545:Dogan, Aysel (2005).
2114:Audi, Robert (2003).
2089:www.rep.routledge.com
1999:Audi, Robert (2001).
1966:Philosophical Studies
1860:10.32082/fp.v3i53.219
1632:Ho, Hock Lai (2015).
1296:Philosophy of Science
1220:Hierarchy of evidence
1195:Evidence-based policy
1145:Evidence-based design
1077:Relationship evidence
1022:. Similarly, in most
972:Legal burden of proof
925:
879:
835:statistical inference
806:
804:{\displaystyle white}
774:
745:
680:
575:
437:private mental states
421:scientific hypotheses
260:philosophy of science
230:legal burden of proof
166:statistical inference
141:intellectual evidence
105:scientific hypotheses
92:philosophy of science
29:
4044:The Scientific Image
3715:Structuration theory
3678:Qualitative research
3579:Criticism of science
3574:Critical rationalism
3510:Problem of induction
2219:Ströker, Elisabeth.
1429:Brand, Gerd (1955).
1087:Testimonial evidence
1018:until proven guilty
783:
772:{\displaystyle swan}
754:
689:
612:
534:
214:documentary evidence
19:For other uses, see
4020:One-Dimensional Man
3468:Geisteswissenschaft
3451:Confirmation holism
3007:Philosophical logic
2413:Syracuse University
1082:Scientific evidence
1067:Personal experience
1044:In a philosophical
900:Admissible evidence
839:Scientific evidence
821:Scientific evidence
482:through different,
452:Logical positivists
353:logical positivists
60:, evidence is what
4095:Hans-Georg Gadamer
3896:Alexander Bogdanov
3772:Positivismusstreit
3567:Post-behavioralism
3531:history of science
3383:Principal concepts
3339:Logical positivism
3071:Unity of opposites
2312:Noë, Alva (2007).
1720:Mittag, Daniel M.
1435:Welt, Ich und Zeit
1387:on 20 October 2021
1230:Mathematical proof
1225:Logical positivism
1125:Evidence packaging
932:
886:
866:anecdotal evidence
801:
769:
740:
675:
570:
487:conceptual schemes
357:Timothy Williamson
240:Nature of evidence
150:empirical evidence
71:to hold a certain
40:
4189:
4188:
4176:
4175:
4172:
4171:
4070:Theodor W. Adorno
3886:Richard Avenarius
3762:Werturteilsstreit
3723:
3722:
3671:Sense-data theory
3369:Polish positivism
3344:Positivist school
3251:
3250:
3103:List of fallacies
3088:Explanatory power
3015:Critical thinking
2881:on 19 August 2010
2617:Sydney Law Review
2447:978-1-4419-9863-7
2174:Husserl, Edmund.
2039:978-0-19-172868-6
1946:978-0-19-159867-8
1452:978-94-011-9616-1
1346:978-1-4987-5206-0
1072:Physical evidence
1016:presumed innocent
606:first-order logic
600:According to the
448:temporal priority
226:questions of fact
218:physical evidence
202:rules of evidence
129:scientific method
67:or what makes it
4216:
4165:
4151:
4075:Gaston Bachelard
3996:Truth and Method
3980:World Hypotheses
3860:The Two Cultures
3775:
3765:
3755:
3740:
3729:
3471:
3425:Unity of science
3334:Legal positivism
3293:
3278:
3271:
3264:
3255:
3233:Platonic realism
3000:
2993:
2986:
2977:
2972:
2964:
2962:"Evidence"
2941:
2927:
2914:Zalta, Edward N.
2891:
2890:
2888:
2886:
2871:
2865:
2864:
2862:
2860:
2843:
2837:
2836:
2804:
2798:
2797:
2765:
2759:
2758:
2718:
2709:
2708:
2706:
2704:
2690:
2684:
2683:
2681:
2679:
2673:Oxford Reference
2665:
2659:
2658:
2656:
2654:
2639:
2633:
2632:
2630:
2628:
2608:
2602:
2601:
2599:
2597:
2581:
2575:
2574:
2542:
2533:
2532:
2530:
2528:
2512:
2506:
2505:
2503:
2501:
2485:
2479:
2478:
2476:
2474:
2458:
2452:
2451:
2423:
2417:
2416:
2400:
2394:
2393:
2391:
2389:
2375:
2369:
2368:
2366:
2364:
2348:
2342:
2341:
2324:(1â2): 231â245.
2309:
2303:
2302:
2290:
2284:
2283:
2273:
2267:
2266:
2242:
2236:
2235:
2233:
2231:
2216:
2210:
2209:
2207:
2205:
2190:
2184:
2183:
2171:
2162:
2161:
2159:
2157:
2142:
2136:
2135:
2111:
2105:
2104:
2102:
2100:
2080:
2074:
2073:
2071:
2069:
2050:
2044:
2043:
2013:
2007:
2006:
1996:
1990:
1989:
1957:
1951:
1950:
1922:
1911:
1910:
1908:
1906:
1890:
1881:
1880:
1862:
1838:
1829:
1828:
1826:
1824:
1817:www.worldcat.org
1809:
1803:
1802:
1800:
1798:
1782:
1759:
1758:
1748:
1737:
1736:
1734:
1732:
1717:
1711:
1710:
1708:
1706:
1690:
1684:
1683:
1673:
1650:
1649:
1647:
1645:
1629:
1623:
1622:
1620:
1618:
1602:
1553:
1552:
1550:
1548:
1536:DiFate, Victor.
1533:
1496:
1495:
1463:
1457:
1456:
1426:
1415:
1403:
1397:
1396:
1394:
1392:
1374:
1365:
1364:
1354:
1348:
1334:
1328:
1327:
1287:
1265:Validity (logic)
1062:Digital evidence
1024:civil procedures
948:chain of custody
905:reasonable doubt
849:all challenges.
810:
808:
807:
802:
778:
776:
775:
770:
749:
747:
746:
741:
684:
682:
681:
676:
579:
577:
576:
571:
476:theory-ladenness
401:
391:In phenomenology
345:Bertrand Russell
333:test of evidence
168:are generated).
137:theory-ladenness
4224:
4223:
4219:
4218:
4217:
4215:
4214:
4213:
4194:
4193:
4190:
4185:
4168:
4124:
4090:Paul Feyerabend
4085:Wilhelm Dilthey
4058:
3935:
3874:
3791:
3734:
3719:
3666:Ramsey sentence
3621:Instrumentalism
3550:
3528:
3526:paradigm shifts
3519:
3456:Critical theory
3434:
3430:Verificationism
3378:
3374:Russian Machism
3322:
3287:
3282:
3252:
3247:
3218:Logical atomism
3174:
3067:Socratic method
3018:
3009:
3004:
2959:
2930:
2912:
2900:
2895:
2894:
2884:
2882:
2873:
2872:
2868:
2858:
2856:
2845:
2844:
2840:
2806:
2805:
2801:
2767:
2766:
2762:
2720:
2719:
2712:
2702:
2700:
2692:
2691:
2687:
2677:
2675:
2667:
2666:
2662:
2652:
2650:
2641:
2640:
2636:
2626:
2624:
2610:
2609:
2605:
2595:
2593:
2583:
2582:
2578:
2544:
2543:
2536:
2526:
2524:
2514:
2513:
2509:
2499:
2497:
2487:
2486:
2482:
2472:
2470:
2460:
2459:
2455:
2448:
2425:
2424:
2420:
2402:
2401:
2397:
2387:
2385:
2377:
2376:
2372:
2362:
2360:
2350:
2349:
2345:
2311:
2310:
2306:
2292:
2291:
2287:
2275:
2274:
2270:
2244:
2243:
2239:
2229:
2227:
2218:
2217:
2213:
2203:
2201:
2193:Janssen, Paul.
2192:
2191:
2187:
2173:
2172:
2165:
2155:
2153:
2144:
2143:
2139:
2113:
2112:
2108:
2098:
2096:
2082:
2081:
2077:
2067:
2065:
2052:
2051:
2047:
2040:
2015:
2014:
2010:
1998:
1997:
1993:
1959:
1958:
1954:
1947:
1924:
1923:
1914:
1904:
1902:
1892:
1891:
1884:
1847:Forum Prawnicze
1840:
1839:
1832:
1822:
1820:
1811:
1810:
1806:
1796:
1794:
1784:
1783:
1762:
1750:
1749:
1740:
1730:
1728:
1722:"Evidentialism"
1719:
1718:
1714:
1704:
1702:
1692:
1691:
1687:
1675:
1674:
1653:
1643:
1641:
1631:
1630:
1626:
1616:
1614:
1604:
1603:
1556:
1546:
1544:
1535:
1534:
1499:
1465:
1464:
1460:
1453:
1428:
1427:
1418:
1404:
1400:
1390:
1388:
1376:
1375:
1368:
1356:
1355:
1351:
1335:
1331:
1289:
1288:
1279:
1274:
1269:
1100:
1058:
982:burden of proof
978:
970:Main articles:
968:
966:Burden of proof
944:
920:
896:burden of proof
892:
874:
837:are generated.
823:
817:
781:
780:
752:
751:
687:
686:
610:
609:
532:
531:
500:
484:incommensurable
433:uncontroversial
425:neutral arbiter
408:
393:
365:
363:In epistemology
341:
283:
281:Characteristics
247:
242:
125:uncontroversial
24:
17:
12:
11:
5:
4222:
4220:
4212:
4211:
4206:
4196:
4195:
4187:
4186:
4181:
4178:
4177:
4174:
4173:
4170:
4169:
4167:
4166:
4157:
4152:
4143:
4138:
4132:
4130:
4126:
4125:
4123:
4122:
4117:
4112:
4107:
4102:
4097:
4092:
4087:
4082:
4077:
4072:
4066:
4064:
4060:
4059:
4057:
4056:
4048:
4040:
4032:
4024:
4016:
4008:
4000:
3992:
3984:
3976:
3968:
3960:
3952:
3943:
3941:
3937:
3936:
3934:
3933:
3928:
3923:
3918:
3913:
3911:Ămile Durkheim
3908:
3903:
3898:
3893:
3888:
3882:
3880:
3876:
3875:
3873:
3872:
3864:
3856:
3848:
3840:
3832:
3824:
3816:
3808:
3799:
3797:
3793:
3792:
3790:
3789:
3783:
3777:
3767:
3757:
3752:Methodenstreit
3746:
3744:
3736:
3735:
3732:
3725:
3724:
3721:
3720:
3718:
3717:
3712:
3707:
3702:
3701:
3700:
3693:Social science
3690:
3685:
3680:
3675:
3674:
3673:
3668:
3663:
3653:
3648:
3646:Operationalism
3643:
3638:
3633:
3628:
3623:
3618:
3613:
3612:
3611:
3606:
3601:
3596:
3591:
3581:
3576:
3571:
3570:
3569:
3558:
3556:
3555:Related topics
3552:
3551:
3549:
3548:
3542:
3535:
3533:
3521:
3520:
3518:
3517:
3512:
3507:
3502:
3497:
3492:
3487:
3482:
3477:
3472:
3463:
3461:Falsifiability
3458:
3453:
3448:
3446:Antipositivism
3442:
3440:
3436:
3435:
3433:
3432:
3427:
3422:
3417:
3412:
3407:
3402:
3397:
3392:
3386:
3384:
3380:
3379:
3377:
3376:
3371:
3366:
3361:
3356:
3351:
3349:Postpositivism
3346:
3341:
3336:
3330:
3328:
3324:
3323:
3321:
3320:
3315:
3310:
3305:
3299:
3297:
3289:
3288:
3283:
3281:
3280:
3273:
3266:
3258:
3249:
3248:
3246:
3245:
3240:
3235:
3230:
3225:
3220:
3215:
3210:
3205:
3200:
3195:
3190:
3188:Constructivism
3184:
3182:
3176:
3175:
3173:
3172:
3167:
3162:
3157:
3152:
3147:
3142:
3137:
3132:
3127:
3122:
3117:
3112:
3107:
3106:
3105:
3095:
3090:
3085:
3080:
3075:
3074:
3073:
3055:
3050:
3045:
3040:
3035:
3030:
3024:
3022:
3020:informal logic
3011:
3010:
3005:
3003:
3002:
2995:
2988:
2980:
2974:
2973:
2957:
2951:
2942:
2928:
2910:
2899:
2898:External links
2896:
2893:
2892:
2866:
2838:
2819:(3): 395â404.
2799:
2786:10.1086/289886
2780:(4): 561â579.
2760:
2710:
2685:
2660:
2642:Huber, Franz.
2634:
2603:
2576:
2557:(2): 243â259.
2534:
2507:
2480:
2453:
2446:
2418:
2395:
2370:
2343:
2304:
2285:
2268:
2237:
2225:Schwabe online
2211:
2199:Schwabe online
2185:
2180:www.textlog.de
2163:
2137:
2126:(1): 177â180.
2106:
2083:Oppy, Graham.
2075:
2045:
2038:
2008:
1991:
1972:(2): 311â324.
1952:
1945:
1912:
1882:
1830:
1804:
1787:"Confirmation"
1760:
1738:
1712:
1695:"Epistemology"
1685:
1651:
1624:
1554:
1497:
1458:
1451:
1416:
1398:
1366:
1349:
1329:
1308:10.1086/392819
1276:
1275:
1273:
1270:
1268:
1267:
1262:
1257:
1252:
1247:
1242:
1237:
1232:
1227:
1222:
1217:
1215:Falsifiability
1212:
1207:
1202:
1197:
1192:
1187:
1182:
1177:
1172:
1167:
1162:
1157:
1152:
1147:
1142:
1137:
1132:
1127:
1122:
1117:
1112:
1107:
1101:
1099:
1096:
1095:
1094:
1092:Trace evidence
1089:
1084:
1079:
1074:
1069:
1064:
1057:
1054:
1004:criminal trial
997:
996:
993:
967:
964:
943:
940:
919:
916:
890:Evidence (law)
888:Main article:
873:
870:
819:Main article:
816:
813:
800:
797:
794:
791:
788:
768:
765:
762:
759:
739:
736:
733:
730:
727:
724:
721:
718:
715:
712:
709:
706:
703:
700:
697:
694:
674:
671:
668:
665:
662:
659:
656:
653:
650:
647:
644:
641:
638:
635:
632:
629:
626:
623:
620:
617:
569:
566:
563:
560:
557:
554:
551:
548:
545:
542:
539:
499:
496:
407:
404:
399:selbst-gegeben
392:
389:
364:
361:
340:
337:
329:
328:
325:
322:
319:
312:
311:
308:
305:
301:
298:
295:
282:
279:
246:
243:
241:
238:
234:capital crimes
15:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
4221:
4210:
4207:
4205:
4202:
4201:
4199:
4192:
4184:
4179:
4164:
4163:
4158:
4156:
4153:
4150:
4149:
4144:
4142:
4139:
4137:
4134:
4133:
4131:
4127:
4121:
4118:
4116:
4113:
4111:
4108:
4106:
4105:György Lukåcs
4103:
4101:
4098:
4096:
4093:
4091:
4088:
4086:
4083:
4081:
4078:
4076:
4073:
4071:
4068:
4067:
4065:
4061:
4054:
4053:
4049:
4046:
4045:
4041:
4038:
4037:
4033:
4030:
4029:
4025:
4022:
4021:
4017:
4014:
4013:
4009:
4006:
4005:
4001:
3998:
3997:
3993:
3990:
3989:
3985:
3982:
3981:
3977:
3974:
3973:
3969:
3966:
3965:
3961:
3958:
3957:
3953:
3950:
3949:
3945:
3944:
3942:
3938:
3932:
3931:Vienna Circle
3929:
3927:
3926:Berlin Circle
3924:
3922:
3919:
3917:
3914:
3912:
3909:
3907:
3906:Eugen DĂŒhring
3904:
3902:
3901:Auguste Comte
3899:
3897:
3894:
3892:
3889:
3887:
3884:
3883:
3881:
3877:
3870:
3869:
3865:
3862:
3861:
3857:
3854:
3853:
3849:
3846:
3845:
3841:
3838:
3837:
3833:
3830:
3829:
3825:
3822:
3821:
3817:
3814:
3813:
3809:
3806:
3805:
3801:
3800:
3798:
3796:Contributions
3794:
3787:
3784:
3781:
3778:
3774:
3773:
3768:
3764:
3763:
3758:
3754:
3753:
3748:
3747:
3745:
3741:
3737:
3730:
3726:
3716:
3713:
3711:
3710:Structuralism
3708:
3706:
3703:
3699:
3696:
3695:
3694:
3691:
3689:
3686:
3684:
3681:
3679:
3676:
3672:
3669:
3667:
3664:
3662:
3659:
3658:
3657:
3654:
3652:
3651:Phenomenalism
3649:
3647:
3644:
3642:
3639:
3637:
3634:
3632:
3629:
3627:
3624:
3622:
3619:
3617:
3614:
3610:
3607:
3605:
3602:
3600:
3597:
3595:
3592:
3590:
3587:
3586:
3585:
3582:
3580:
3577:
3575:
3572:
3568:
3565:
3564:
3563:
3562:Behavioralism
3560:
3559:
3557:
3553:
3546:
3543:
3540:
3537:
3536:
3534:
3532:
3527:
3522:
3516:
3513:
3511:
3508:
3506:
3503:
3501:
3498:
3496:
3493:
3491:
3490:Human science
3488:
3486:
3483:
3481:
3478:
3476:
3473:
3470:
3469:
3464:
3462:
3459:
3457:
3454:
3452:
3449:
3447:
3444:
3443:
3441:
3437:
3431:
3428:
3426:
3423:
3421:
3418:
3416:
3415:Pseudoscience
3413:
3411:
3410:Justification
3408:
3406:
3403:
3401:
3398:
3396:
3393:
3391:
3388:
3387:
3385:
3381:
3375:
3372:
3370:
3367:
3365:
3362:
3360:
3357:
3355:
3352:
3350:
3347:
3345:
3342:
3340:
3337:
3335:
3332:
3331:
3329:
3325:
3319:
3316:
3314:
3311:
3309:
3306:
3304:
3301:
3300:
3298:
3294:
3290:
3286:
3279:
3274:
3272:
3267:
3265:
3260:
3259:
3256:
3244:
3241:
3239:
3236:
3234:
3231:
3229:
3226:
3224:
3221:
3219:
3216:
3214:
3211:
3209:
3206:
3204:
3201:
3199:
3196:
3194:
3191:
3189:
3186:
3185:
3183:
3181:
3177:
3171:
3168:
3166:
3163:
3161:
3158:
3156:
3153:
3151:
3148:
3146:
3143:
3141:
3138:
3136:
3133:
3131:
3128:
3126:
3123:
3121:
3118:
3116:
3113:
3111:
3108:
3104:
3101:
3100:
3099:
3096:
3094:
3091:
3089:
3086:
3084:
3081:
3079:
3076:
3072:
3068:
3064:
3061:
3060:
3059:
3056:
3054:
3051:
3049:
3046:
3044:
3041:
3039:
3036:
3034:
3031:
3029:
3026:
3025:
3023:
3021:
3016:
3012:
3008:
3001:
2996:
2994:
2989:
2987:
2982:
2981:
2978:
2970:
2969:
2963:
2958:
2955:
2952:
2950:
2946:
2943:
2939:
2938:
2933:
2929:
2925:
2924:
2919:
2915:
2911:
2909:
2905:
2902:
2901:
2897:
2880:
2876:
2870:
2867:
2855:
2851:
2850:
2842:
2839:
2834:
2830:
2826:
2822:
2818:
2814:
2810:
2803:
2800:
2795:
2791:
2787:
2783:
2779:
2775:
2771:
2764:
2761:
2756:
2752:
2748:
2744:
2740:
2736:
2732:
2728:
2724:
2717:
2715:
2711:
2699:
2695:
2689:
2686:
2674:
2670:
2664:
2661:
2649:
2645:
2638:
2635:
2622:
2618:
2614:
2607:
2604:
2591:
2587:
2580:
2577:
2572:
2568:
2564:
2560:
2556:
2552:
2548:
2541:
2539:
2535:
2522:
2518:
2511:
2508:
2495:
2491:
2484:
2481:
2468:
2464:
2457:
2454:
2449:
2443:
2439:
2435:
2431:
2430:
2422:
2419:
2414:
2410:
2406:
2399:
2396:
2384:
2380:
2374:
2371:
2358:
2354:
2347:
2344:
2339:
2335:
2331:
2327:
2323:
2319:
2315:
2308:
2305:
2300:
2296:
2289:
2286:
2281:
2280:
2272:
2269:
2264:
2260:
2256:
2252:
2248:
2241:
2238:
2226:
2222:
2215:
2212:
2200:
2196:
2189:
2186:
2181:
2177:
2170:
2168:
2164:
2152:
2148:
2141:
2138:
2133:
2129:
2125:
2121:
2117:
2110:
2107:
2094:
2090:
2086:
2079:
2076:
2063:
2059:
2055:
2049:
2046:
2041:
2035:
2031:
2027:
2023:
2019:
2012:
2009:
2004:
2003:
1995:
1992:
1987:
1983:
1979:
1975:
1971:
1967:
1963:
1956:
1953:
1948:
1942:
1938:
1934:
1930:
1929:
1921:
1919:
1917:
1913:
1900:
1896:
1889:
1887:
1883:
1878:
1874:
1870:
1866:
1861:
1856:
1852:
1848:
1844:
1837:
1835:
1831:
1818:
1814:
1808:
1805:
1792:
1788:
1781:
1779:
1777:
1775:
1773:
1771:
1769:
1767:
1765:
1761:
1756:
1755:
1747:
1745:
1743:
1739:
1727:
1723:
1716:
1713:
1700:
1696:
1689:
1686:
1681:
1680:
1672:
1670:
1668:
1666:
1664:
1662:
1660:
1658:
1656:
1652:
1639:
1635:
1628:
1625:
1612:
1608:
1601:
1599:
1597:
1595:
1593:
1591:
1589:
1587:
1585:
1583:
1581:
1579:
1577:
1575:
1573:
1571:
1569:
1567:
1565:
1563:
1561:
1559:
1555:
1543:
1539:
1532:
1530:
1528:
1526:
1524:
1522:
1520:
1518:
1516:
1514:
1512:
1510:
1508:
1506:
1504:
1502:
1498:
1493:
1489:
1485:
1481:
1478:(1): 84â106.
1477:
1473:
1469:
1462:
1459:
1454:
1448:
1444:
1440:
1436:
1432:
1425:
1423:
1421:
1417:
1413:
1412:
1407:
1406:Rudolf Eisler
1402:
1399:
1386:
1382:
1381:
1373:
1371:
1367:
1362:
1361:
1353:
1350:
1347:
1343:
1339:
1333:
1330:
1325:
1321:
1317:
1313:
1309:
1305:
1302:: S193âS207.
1301:
1297:
1293:
1286:
1284:
1282:
1278:
1271:
1266:
1263:
1261:
1258:
1256:
1253:
1251:
1248:
1246:
1245:Proof (truth)
1243:
1241:
1238:
1236:
1233:
1231:
1228:
1226:
1223:
1221:
1218:
1216:
1213:
1211:
1208:
1206:
1203:
1201:
1198:
1196:
1193:
1191:
1188:
1186:
1183:
1181:
1178:
1176:
1173:
1171:
1168:
1166:
1163:
1161:
1158:
1156:
1153:
1151:
1148:
1146:
1143:
1141:
1138:
1136:
1133:
1131:
1128:
1126:
1123:
1121:
1118:
1116:
1115:Best practice
1113:
1111:
1108:
1106:
1103:
1102:
1097:
1093:
1090:
1088:
1085:
1083:
1080:
1078:
1075:
1073:
1070:
1068:
1065:
1063:
1060:
1059:
1055:
1053:
1051:
1047:
1042:
1040:
1039:
1034:
1029:
1025:
1021:
1017:
1013:
1009:
1005:
1000:
994:
991:
990:
989:
986:
983:
977:
973:
965:
963:
961:
955:
953:
949:
941:
939:
937:
929:
924:
917:
915:
912:
910:
906:
901:
897:
891:
883:
878:
871:
869:
867:
863:
859:
855:
850:
846:
844:
840:
836:
832:
828:
822:
814:
812:
798:
795:
792:
789:
786:
766:
763:
760:
757:
734:
728:
725:
722:
719:
716:
713:
707:
701:
698:
695:
692:
666:
660:
657:
654:
651:
648:
639:
633:
630:
627:
624:
618:
607:
603:
598:
595:
594:observational
591:
590:
585:
583:
582:Alvin Goldman
564:
558:
555:
549:
546:
543:
537:
529:
525:
521:
519:
515:
514:
509:
504:
497:
495:
492:
488:
485:
481:
477:
471:
469:
464:
462:
457:
453:
449:
444:
442:
438:
434:
430:
426:
422:
419:
415:
414:
405:
403:
400:
390:
388:
385:
381:
376:
372:
370:
362:
360:
358:
354:
350:
346:
338:
336:
334:
326:
323:
320:
317:
316:
315:
309:
306:
302:
299:
296:
293:
292:
291:
287:
280:
278:
275:
271:
268:
263:
261:
257:
252:
244:
239:
237:
235:
231:
227:
223:
222:trier of fact
219:
215:
211:
207:
203:
199:
195:
191:
187:
182:
181:observational
178:
174:
169:
167:
163:
159:
154:
152:
151:
146:
142:
138:
134:
130:
126:
122:
118:
114:
110:
106:
103:
99:
98:
93:
88:
86:
82:
81:phenomenology
77:
74:
70:
66:
63:
59:
54:
52:
48:
44:
37:
33:
28:
22:
4191:
4050:
4042:
4034:
4026:
4018:
4010:
4002:
3994:
3986:
3978:
3970:
3962:
3954:
3946:
3866:
3858:
3850:
3842:
3834:
3826:
3818:
3810:
3802:
3786:Science wars
3584:Epistemology
3515:Reflectivism
3475:Hermeneutics
3399:
3327:Declinations
3303:Antihumanism
3296:Perspectives
3213:Intuitionism
3198:Fictionalism
3077:
2966:
2935:
2921:
2883:. Retrieved
2879:the original
2869:
2857:. Retrieved
2848:
2841:
2816:
2812:
2802:
2777:
2773:
2763:
2733:(1): 58â82.
2730:
2726:
2701:. Retrieved
2697:
2688:
2676:. Retrieved
2672:
2663:
2651:. Retrieved
2647:
2637:
2625:. Retrieved
2620:
2616:
2606:
2594:. Retrieved
2589:
2579:
2554:
2550:
2525:. Retrieved
2520:
2510:
2498:. Retrieved
2493:
2483:
2471:. Retrieved
2466:
2456:
2428:
2421:
2408:
2398:
2386:. Retrieved
2382:
2373:
2361:. Retrieved
2356:
2346:
2321:
2317:
2307:
2298:
2288:
2278:
2271:
2257:(1): 70â83.
2254:
2250:
2240:
2228:. Retrieved
2224:
2214:
2202:. Retrieved
2198:
2188:
2179:
2154:. Retrieved
2150:
2140:
2123:
2119:
2109:
2097:. Retrieved
2088:
2078:
2066:. Retrieved
2057:
2048:
2021:
2011:
2001:
1994:
1969:
1965:
1955:
1927:
1903:. Retrieved
1898:
1895:"Sense-Data"
1850:
1846:
1821:. Retrieved
1819:(in Spanish)
1816:
1807:
1795:. Retrieved
1790:
1753:
1729:. Retrieved
1725:
1715:
1703:. Retrieved
1698:
1688:
1678:
1642:. Retrieved
1637:
1627:
1615:. Retrieved
1610:
1545:. Retrieved
1541:
1475:
1471:
1461:
1434:
1410:
1401:
1389:. Retrieved
1385:the original
1379:
1359:
1352:
1337:
1332:
1299:
1295:
1043:
1036:
1001:
998:
987:
981:
979:
956:
952:inadmissible
945:
942:Presentation
933:
913:
893:
882:Lady Justice
864:inherent to
851:
847:
824:
601:
599:
587:
586:
523:
522:
517:
511:
507:
503:Philosophers
501:
494:this sense.
472:
465:
460:
455:
447:
445:
440:
436:
432:
428:
424:
417:
411:
409:
394:
384:Matrix movie
377:
373:
366:
342:
332:
330:
313:
288:
284:
264:
256:epistemology
248:
170:
155:
148:
145:self-evident
140:
124:
120:
101:
95:
89:
78:
58:epistemology
55:
42:
41:
4141:Objectivity
4110:Karl Popper
4100:Thomas Kuhn
4080:Mario Bunge
3831:(1879â1884)
3766:(1909â1959)
3500:Metaphysics
3480:Historicism
3395:Demarcation
3390:Consilience
3313:Rationalism
3193:Dialetheism
3083:Explanation
3053:Credibility
1038:prima facie
1008:prosecution
827:experiments
418:disconfirms
258:and in the
251:proposition
143:or what is
102:disconfirms
47:proposition
4198:Categories
3921:Ernst Mach
3916:Ernst Laas
3891:A. J. Ayer
3879:Proponents
3698:Philosophy
3495:Humanities
3439:Antitheses
3308:Empiricism
3285:Positivism
3238:Pragmatism
3228:Nominalism
3135:Propaganda
3110:Hypothesis
3063:Antithesis
2932:"Evidence"
2918:"Evidence"
2908:PhilPapers
2852:. p.
1607:"Evidence"
1538:"Evidence"
1272:References
1255:Skepticism
1120:Empiricism
1050:resolution
918:Collection
858:refutation
843:hypothesis
831:laboratory
206:admissible
173:philosophy
85:philosophy
4162:Verstehen
4148:Phronesis
4136:Knowledge
4120:Max Weber
3940:Criticism
3688:Sociology
3626:Modernism
3604:pluralism
3589:anarchism
3485:Historism
3405:Induction
3318:Scientism
3208:Formalism
3170:Vagueness
3150:Relevance
3145:Reasoning
3058:Dialectic
3033:Ambiguity
2833:148236513
2794:121195603
2755:147343629
2747:1862-8990
2623:: 545â561
2571:120030170
2230:3 October
2204:3 October
1877:229718454
1869:2081-688X
1484:0342-8117
1363:. Meiner.
1316:0031-8248
1028:plaintiff
1012:defendant
714:∧
646:→
616:∀
547:∣
491:consensus
461:epistemic
267:justifies
210:testimony
62:justifies
32:contrails
4204:Evidence
4183:Category
3599:nihilism
3594:idealism
3524:Related
3400:Evidence
3223:Logicism
3203:Finitism
3155:Rhetoric
3140:Prudence
3078:Evidence
3038:Argument
3028:Analysis
2945:Evidence
2904:Evidence
2859:11 March
2338:24597361
2093:Archived
2062:Archived
1986:56299607
1928:Evidence
1492:24360376
1324:61281250
1105:Argument
1098:See also
936:criminal
516:and the
456:semantic
413:confirms
380:rational
304:evident.
274:rational
160:and the
158:sciences
113:Einstein
97:confirms
73:doxastic
69:rational
43:Evidence
4063:Critics
3788:(1990s)
3782:(1980s)
3776:(1960s)
3756:(1890s)
3609:realism
3541:(1830s)
3529:in the
3243:Realism
3130:Premise
3120:Opinion
3115:Inquiry
3098:Fallacy
2947:at the
2916:(ed.).
2885:18 July
2703:15 June
2678:15 June
2653:6 March
2627:30 June
2596:14 June
2527:15 June
2500:15 June
2473:15 June
2388:15 June
2363:15 June
2156:15 June
2099:2 April
2068:2 April
1905:15 June
1797:13 June
1731:15 June
1705:15 June
1644:11 June
1617:11 June
1547:11 June
1411:Evidenz
1408:: Art.
1391:4 April
439:but of
369:beliefs
270:beliefs
188:of the
65:beliefs
36:airshow
4055:(1986)
4047:(1980)
4039:(1978)
4031:(1968)
4023:(1964)
4015:(1963)
4007:(1962)
3999:(1960)
3991:(1951)
3983:(1942)
3975:(1936)
3967:(1934)
3959:(1923)
3951:(1909)
3871:(2001)
3863:(1959)
3855:(1936)
3847:(1927)
3839:(1886)
3823:(1869)
3815:(1848)
3807:(1830)
3743:Method
3616:Holism
3547:(1927)
3165:Theory
3043:Belief
2831:
2792:
2753:
2745:
2569:
2444:
2336:
2036:
1984:
1943:
1875:
1867:
1853:(53).
1823:27 May
1490:
1482:
1449:
1344:
1322:
1314:
1250:Reason
1110:Belief
1046:debate
1033:arrest
1026:, the
898:lies.
779:" or "
429:public
351:, the
245:Notion
216:, and
121:public
45:for a
34:at an
30:These
4155:Truth
3160:Rigor
2829:S2CID
2790:S2CID
2751:S2CID
2567:S2CID
2334:S2CID
1982:S2CID
1873:S2CID
1488:JSTOR
1320:S2CID
1002:In a
829:in a
480:world
196:. In
190:truth
186:proof
109:orbit
3093:Fact
3048:Bias
2954:ASTM
2887:2008
2861:2020
2743:ISSN
2705:2021
2680:2021
2655:2021
2629:2021
2598:2021
2529:2021
2502:2021
2475:2021
2442:ISBN
2390:2021
2365:2021
2232:2021
2206:2021
2158:2021
2101:2021
2070:2021
2034:ISBN
1941:ISBN
1907:2021
1865:ISSN
1825:2023
1799:2021
1733:2021
1707:2021
1646:2021
1619:2021
1549:2021
1480:ISSN
1447:ISBN
1393:2022
1342:ISBN
1312:ISSN
1035:), "
980:The
974:and
862:bias
556:>
431:and
147:and
123:and
51:true
3017:and
2906:at
2821:doi
2782:doi
2735:doi
2559:doi
2434:doi
2326:doi
2259:doi
2128:doi
2026:doi
1974:doi
1970:145
1933:doi
1855:doi
1439:doi
1304:doi
1014:is
928:FBI
926:An
872:Law
416:or
198:law
162:law
115:'s
100:or
90:In
79:In
56:In
4200::
3069:,
3065:,
2965:.
2934:.
2920:.
2827:.
2817:11
2815:.
2811:.
2788:.
2778:62
2776:.
2772:.
2749:.
2741:.
2731:10
2729:.
2725:.
2713:^
2696:.
2671:.
2646:.
2621:33
2619:.
2615:.
2588:.
2565:.
2555:36
2553:.
2549:.
2537:^
2519:.
2492:.
2465:.
2440:.
2407:.
2381:.
2355:.
2332:.
2320:.
2316:.
2297:.
2255:57
2253:.
2249:.
2223:.
2197:.
2178:.
2166:^
2149:.
2124:67
2122:.
2118:.
2091:.
2087:.
2060:.
2056:.
2032:.
2020:.
1980:.
1968:.
1964:.
1939:.
1915:^
1897:.
1885:^
1871:.
1863:.
1849:.
1845:.
1833:^
1815:.
1789:.
1763:^
1741:^
1724:.
1697:.
1654:^
1636:.
1609:.
1557:^
1540:.
1500:^
1486:.
1474:.
1470:.
1445:.
1433:.
1419:^
1369:^
1318:.
1310:.
1300:67
1298:.
1294:.
1280:^
962:.
954:.
868:.
845:.
520:.
510:,
443:.
355:,
347:,
212:,
200:,
3277:e
3270:t
3263:v
2999:e
2992:t
2985:v
2940:.
2926:.
2889:.
2863:.
2854:9
2835:.
2823::
2796:.
2784::
2757:.
2737::
2707:.
2682:.
2657:.
2631:.
2600:.
2573:.
2561::
2531:.
2504:.
2477:.
2450:.
2436::
2415:.
2392:.
2367:.
2340:.
2328::
2322:6
2265:.
2261::
2234:.
2208:.
2182:.
2160:.
2134:.
2130::
2103:.
2072:.
2042:.
2028::
1988:.
1976::
1949:.
1935::
1909:.
1879:.
1857::
1851:3
1827:.
1801:.
1735:.
1709:.
1648:.
1621:.
1551:.
1494:.
1476:1
1455:.
1441::
1395:.
1326:.
1306::
799:e
796:t
793:i
790:h
787:w
767:n
764:a
761:w
758:s
738:)
735:a
732:(
729:e
726:t
723:i
720:h
717:w
711:)
708:a
705:(
702:n
699:a
696:w
693:s
673:)
670:)
667:x
664:(
661:e
658:t
655:i
652:h
649:w
643:)
640:x
637:(
634:n
631:a
628:w
625:s
622:(
619:x
568:)
565:H
562:(
559:P
553:)
550:E
544:H
541:(
538:P
396:(
23:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
