413:). 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.
382:. 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.
608:
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.
591:. 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
288:
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.
386:
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.
888:
481:, 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.
38:
273:. 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.
934:
370:, 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.
969:
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
1059:, 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
489:. 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
434:. 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
615:, 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
461:, 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.
859:
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
385:
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
194:
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
995:
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
287:
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
264:
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
607:
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.
504:
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
296:
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
86:
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
913:
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
397:
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
469:
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
516:
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
968:
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
619:: 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 "
500:, 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
94:, 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
398:
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.
186:, 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
265:
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
914:
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
484:
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
2231:
406:
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"
314:
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
541:, 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
283:. 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
300:
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:
961:. 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
2205:
1041:
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
822:" 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.
150:, 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:
761:" (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 "
694:
231:. 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
603:
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
332:
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.
1245:
759:
589:
474:
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.
922:, 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.
318:
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.
247:) 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.
945:
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
1824:"Rafael CORAZĂN GONZĂLEZ, FilosofĂa del conocimiento, Eunsa («IniciaciĂłn FilosĂłfica », 21), Pamplona 2002, 212 pp., 17 x 24, ISBN 84-313-2001-X | WorldCat.org"
1195:
1170:
820:
393:
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
788:
138:, 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
1010:
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.
308:
What is evident aligns coherently with other truths acquired through knowledge. Any insurmountable incoherence would indicate the presence of error or falsehood.
142:
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
3008:
2028:
696:" (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. "
2978:
595:, 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.
3198:
2103:
2072:
446:
so that proponents of competing scientific theories agree on what evidence is available. These requirements suggest scientific evidence consists not of
3693:
494:
4014:
3790:
1937:
2456:
2048:
1955:
1461:
1356:
3286:
836:
In scientific research evidence is accumulated through observations of phenomena that occur in the natural world, or which are created as
2959:
2947:
2933:
335:
Consequently, evident truths appear to be widely shared, strongly connected to common sense, which comprises generally accepted beliefs.
203:
of a hypothesis to weak evidence that is merely consistent with the hypothesis but does not rule out other, competing hypotheses, as in
2157:
4219:
3974:
3958:
3814:
3001:
863:
When evidence is contradictory to predicted expectations, the evidence and the ways of making it are often closely scrutinized (see
329:
The evident instills certainty and grants the knower a subjective sense of security, as they believe to have aligned with the truth
305:
The truth lies in what is evident, while falsehood or irrationality, although it may appear evident at times, lacks true evidence.
3966:
3354:
2501:"The Incommensurability of Scientific Theories: 2.2.2 Conceptual replacement and theory-ladenness of observation: Ludwik Fleck"
3830:
1389:
622:
4038:
3374:
2885:
1180:
1063:
to be supported by one side and refuted by another, the overall burden of proof is on the side supporting the resolution.
957:
The path that physical evidence takes from the scene of a crime or the arrest of a suspect to the courtroom is called the
338:
Evident truths are fertile ground: they provide a solid foundation for other branches of scientific knowledge to flourish.
325:
In addition, four subjective or external characteristics can be detected over those things that are more or less evident:
175:, tend to emphasize more the public nature of evidence (for example, scientists tend to focus on how the data used during
3822:
3708:
3420:
2994:
1250:
887:
277:
127:
72:
925:
After deciding who will carry the burden of proof, the evidence is first gathered and then presented before the court:
130:. In order to play the role of neutral arbiter between competing theories, it is important that scientific evidence is
4022:
3854:
3671:
1145:
986:
599:
523:
457:
It is often held that evidence is in some sense prior to the hypotheses it confirms. This was sometimes understood as
389:
This line of thought is often combined with the idea that evidence, propositional or otherwise, determines what it is
187:
949:
act. The focus of criminal evidence is to connect physical evidence and reports of witnesses to a specific person.
871:
of the hypothesis'. The rules for evidence used by science are collected systematically in an attempt to avoid the
87:
example, whether they have to be propositional, and whether misleading mental states can still qualify as evidence.
3982:
3878:
3862:
3846:
3646:
1215:
1165:
91:
4062:
3614:
3599:
1220:
1175:
1140:
970:
919:
864:
31:
4151:
3998:
3715:
3609:
3604:
3279:
2623:
1160:
1150:
1026:
2679:
2438:
2095:
2064:
60:
is what supports the proposition. It is usually understood as an indication that the supported proposition is
2186:
4125:
3838:
3641:
3619:
3364:
3218:
2389:
1270:
1210:
1200:
1185:
359:
204:
182:
In order for something to act as evidence for a hypothesis, it has to stand in the right relation to it. In
699:
98:
into a rigorous science. However, it is highly controversial whether evidence can meet these requirements.
3549:
3515:
3038:
1190:
4046:
3666:
3651:
3555:
3253:
1230:
1205:
1155:
1087:
982:
906:
845:
544:
538:
270:
240:
176:
102:
996:
from evidence may be subject to criticism based on a perceived failure to fulfill the burden of proof.
438:
between Newton's and
Einstein's theory of gravitation. This is only possible if scientific evidence is
378:
The guiding intuition within epistemology concerning the role of evidence is that it is what justifies
37:
4054:
3725:
3688:
3589:
3584:
3520:
3379:
224:
2733:
2363:
4193:
4030:
3478:
3461:
3415:
3405:
3272:
3190:
3017:
2423:
1092:
1077:
962:
910:
849:
831:
462:
363:
216:
4115:
2704:
2040:
1853:
1441:
4105:
3906:
3782:
3656:
3577:
3541:
3349:
3081:
2864:
2839:
2800:
2761:
2577:
2473:
2344:
1992:
1883:
1498:
1330:
1240:
1235:
1135:
1014:
876:
478:
367:
160:
143:
1765:
Objectivity and
Subjectivity in Epistemology: A Defense of the Phenomenal Conception of Evidence
4214:
4080:
3921:
3896:
3772:
3113:
3098:
3025:
2967:
E141 Standard
Practice for Acceptance of Evidence Based on the Results of Probability Sampling
2753:
2452:
2044:
1951:
1875:
1490:
1457:
1352:
1322:
1082:
867:) and only at the end of this process is the hypothesis rejected: this can be referred to as '
616:
423:
236:
139:
107:
2527:
1052:
evidence", "credible evidence", "substantial evidence", and "clear and convincing evidence".
905:
In law, the production and presentation of evidence depend first on establishing on whom the
4085:
4006:
3990:
3916:
3870:
3435:
3344:
3243:
3135:
2831:
2792:
2745:
2596:
2569:
2444:
2336:
2269:
2138:
2036:
1984:
1943:
1865:
1449:
1314:
1275:
1072:
1060:
1030:
958:
933:
915:
501:
486:
355:
147:
793:
4100:
4095:
3676:
3631:
3466:
3440:
3384:
3228:
3077:
2924:
1034:
764:
2500:
2972:
2858:
2187:"Cartesianische Meditationen: § 24. Evidenz als Selbstgegebenheit und ihre Abwandlungen"
1369:
49:
provide evidence regarding the aircraft's flight path as well as the weather conditions.
3762:
3703:
3536:
3471:
3456:
3359:
3030:
2142:
1302:
1225:
1102:
900:
394:
212:
4208:
3941:
3936:
3911:
3720:
3661:
3572:
3500:
3430:
3425:
2843:
2804:
2765:
2581:
1887:
1644:
1416:
1255:
1125:
844:
or other controlled conditions. Scientists tend to focus on how the data used during
592:
244:
232:
228:
196:
2348:
1996:
1334:
346:
to detect the level of certainty or evidence that one argument or proof could have.
146:, i.e. that the available evidence may support competing theories equally well, and
3796:
3594:
3525:
3485:
3313:
3223:
3208:
2835:
1797:
1705:
892:
266:
155:
68:
2448:
2232:"Historisches Wörterbuch der Philosophie online: Selbstgebung, Selbstgegebenheit"
1905:
1395:
4120:
4110:
4090:
3510:
3490:
3400:
3323:
3203:
3093:
3063:
2624:"The objective Bayesian conceptualisation of proof and reference class problems"
1947:
1453:
1048:
604:
513:
261:
191:
57:
2928:
2889:
2273:
1762:
Gage, Logan Paul (2014). "1. Introduction: Two Rival
Conceptions of Evidence".
1617:
64:. What role evidence plays and how it is conceived varies from field to field.
3931:
3926:
3901:
3681:
3505:
3369:
3318:
3295:
3248:
3238:
3145:
3120:
3073:
2918:
2573:
2340:
1988:
1265:
1130:
1018:
868:
853:
841:
837:
431:
183:
115:
95:
2757:
1879:
1494:
1326:
941:
Evidence
Response Team gathering evidence by dusting an area for fingerprints
4172:
4158:
4146:
4130:
3698:
3636:
3495:
3328:
3180:
3160:
3068:
3043:
1823:
1097:
1038:
1022:
342:
These ten characteristics of what is evident allowed
Riofrio to formulate a
220:
83:
895:
can be seen as representing the weighing of evidence in a legal proceeding.
2749:
1870:
3233:
3213:
3165:
3150:
3048:
2955:
2914:
1115:
497:
390:
284:
123:
79:
42:
2158:"The Architecture of Reason: The Structure and Substance of Rationality"
1502:
1478:
3140:
3130:
3125:
3108:
379:
280:
168:
75:
46:
2986:
2819:
2013:
The
Architecture of Reason: The Structure and Substance of Rationality
2011:
235:
for the other issues of a case. Evidence and rules are used to decide
17:
4156:
3626:
3175:
3170:
3155:
3053:
1260:
1120:
1056:
1043:
2780:
2557:
2305:
2288:
2257:
2126:
1972:
1763:
1303:"Experimental Practice and an Error Statistical Account of Evidence"
2796:
2324:
1318:
517:
confirm a hypothesis. Important theories in this field include the
4165:
2942:
2415:
1688:
1420:
946:
932:
886:
490:
470:
remain constant. The most plausible view is that this priority is
200:
119:
61:
36:
477:
A central issue for the scientific conception of evidence is the
3103:
3058:
2964:
2734:"Interpretation and the Hypothetico-Deductive Method: A Dilemma"
2654:
1732:
1548:
872:
3742:
3268:
2990:
2971:
2206:"Historisches Wörterbuch der Philosophie online: Leerintention"
938:
208:
172:
3264:
2781:"Beyond Bootstrapping: A New Account of Evidential Relevance"
2420:
A Metaphysician's User Guide: The Epistemology of Metaphysics
321:
Evident truths are clear, translucent, and filled with light.
1006:
To what degree of certitude must the assertion be supported?
1347:
American College of Forensic Examiners Institute. (2016).
1246:
National Registry of Evidence-Based Programs and Practices
239:
that are disputed, some of which may be determined by the
2437:
Andersen, Hanne; Green, Sara (2013). "Theory-Ladenness".
1479:"Das PhÀnomen der Evidenz und die Evidenz des PhÀnomens"
219:
in a legal proceeding. Types of legal evidence include
2416:"IV. Metaphysical Beliefs and Persisting Disagreement"
1854:"Evidence and its Proof: Designing a Test of Evidence"
689:{\displaystyle \forall x(swan(x)\rightarrow white(x))}
243:
relevant to the case. Evidence in certain cases (e.g.
1349:
The Certified Criminal Investigator Body of Knowledge
796:
767:
702:
625:
547:
2558:"Confirmation of Scientific Hypotheses as Relations"
1425:, in: Wörterbuch der philosophischen Begriffe, 1904.
1351:. Boca Raton, Florida: CRC Press. pp. 112â113.
4139:
4073:
3950:
3889:
3806:
3753:
3565:
3534:
3449:
3393:
3337:
3306:
3189:
3024:
2306:"Was HeiĂt "Philosophie Als Strenge Wissenschaft"?"
1687:Conee, Earl; Feldman, Richard (2008). "Evidence".
1448:(in German). Springer Netherlands. pp. 1â53.
814:
782:
753:
688:
583:
122:, for example, are seen as evidence that confirms
2860:A Digest of the Law of Evidence in Criminal Cases
1973:"Evidentialism and the Problem of Stored Beliefs"
1391:EnzyklopÀdie Philosophie und Wissenschaftstheorie
918:, the latter considering only which side has the
276:One important intuition is that evidence is what
260:Understood in its broadest sense, evidence for a
465:, on the other hand, held that this priority is
421:In the sciences, evidence is understood as what
311:Evident truths are based on necessary reasoning.
2603:. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University
2534:. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University
2507:. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University
2480:. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University
2370:. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University
2029:"In Defense of Propositionalism about Evidence"
1912:. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University
1804:. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University
1712:. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University
1651:. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University
1624:. Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University
1196:Evidence-based pharmacy in developing countries
1171:Evidence-based library and information practice
852:usually goes towards supporting or rejecting a
3791:Fourth Great Debate in international relations
2499:Oberheim, Eric; Hoyningen-Huene, Paul (2018).
2065:"Philosophy of mind - Propositional attitudes"
3280:
3002:
2035:. Oxford University Press. pp. 226â232.
1931:
1929:
1927:
1383:
1381:
8:
4170:
3780:
3770:
3760:
3476:
2390:"Philosophy of science - Underdetermination"
408:
1442:"Der RĂŒckgang auf das Welterfahrende Leben"
297:formula would appear more evident to them.
164:or evidence accessible through the senses.
3750:
3739:
3303:
3287:
3273:
3265:
3009:
2995:
2987:
2820:"The Objective Confirmation of Hypotheses"
2180:
2178:
3694:Relationship between religion and science
2888:. Federal Evidence Review. Archived from
2562:Journal for General Philosophy of Science
2364:"Underdetermination of Scientific Theory"
2041:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199563500.003.0015
1899:
1897:
1869:
1542:
1540:
1538:
1536:
1534:
1532:
1368:SandkĂŒhler, Hans Jörg (2010). "Evidenz".
1296:
1294:
1292:
891:The balance scales seen in depictions of
795:
766:
701:
624:
546:
2727:
2725:
2551:
2549:
2329:Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences
2131:Philosophy and Phenomenological Research
1791:
1789:
1787:
1785:
1783:
1781:
1779:
1777:
1775:
1682:
1680:
1678:
1676:
1674:
1672:
1670:
1668:
1666:
1611:
1609:
1607:
1605:
1603:
1601:
1599:
1597:
1595:
1593:
1591:
1589:
1530:
1528:
1526:
1524:
1522:
1520:
1518:
1516:
1514:
1512:
354:Important theorists of evidence include
118:. Measurements of Mercury's "anomalous"
4015:The Structure of Scientific Revolutions
2601:The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
2532:The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
2505:The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
2478:The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
2472:Boyd, Nora Mills; Bogen, James (2021).
2368:The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
1910:The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
1802:The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
1757:
1755:
1753:
1710:The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
1649:The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
1622:The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
1587:
1585:
1583:
1581:
1579:
1577:
1575:
1573:
1571:
1569:
1435:
1433:
1431:
1388:MittelstraĂ, JĂŒrgen (2005). "Evidenz".
1288:
1017:in the United States, for example, the
105:, evidence is understood as that which
3370:Machian positivism (empirio-criticism)
2127:"Précis of the Architecture of Reason"
2016:. Oxford University Press. p. 19.
1021:carries the burden of proof since the
1003:On whom does the burden of proof rest?
215:govern the types of evidence that are
2526:Reiss, Julian; Sprenger, Jan (2020).
1847:
1845:
1301:Mayo, Deborah G. (1 September 2000).
754:{\displaystyle swan(a)\land white(a)}
7:
2325:"The Critique of Pure Phenomenology"
2290:Philosophie Als Strenge Wissenschaft
2960:Indiana Philosophy Ontology Project
2948:Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy
2934:Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy
2659:Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy
2474:"Theory and Observation in Science"
1737:Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy
1704:Steup, Matthias; Neta, Ram (2020).
1553:Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy
3647:Nomotheticâidiographic distinction
2857:Roscoe, H.; Granger, T.C. (1840).
2312:. Königshausen & Neumann: 199.
2143:10.1111/j.1933-1592.2003.tb00031.x
999:Two principal considerations are:
626:
584:{\displaystyle P(H\mid E)>P(H)}
25:
3975:The Logic of Scientific Discovery
3959:Materialism and Empirio-criticism
3815:The Course in Positive Philosophy
2732:Folde, Christian (1 March 2016).
2106:from the original on 4 March 2021
2075:from the original on 19 July 2020
2033:Evidentialism and its Discontents
509:Nature of the evidential relation
452:public physical objects or events
2886:"Federal Rules of Evidence 2008"
2443:. Springer. pp. 2165â2167.
2310:Wege zur Politischen Philosophie
2162:Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews
1768:(PhD Thesis). Baylor University.
350:Different approaches to evidence
27:Material supporting an assertion
3967:History and Class Consciousness
2440:Encyclopedia of Systems Biology
2258:"Phanomenologien der Erfahrung"
1645:"The Legal Concept of Evidence"
826:Empirical evidence (in science)
3831:Critical History of Philosophy
2836:10.1080/00455091.1981.10716311
2824:Canadian Journal of Philosophy
2705:"hypothetico-deductive method"
2680:"hypothetico-deductive method"
2414:Lee, James Soo (August 2017).
748:
742:
721:
715:
683:
680:
674:
656:
653:
647:
632:
578:
572:
563:
551:
1:
4039:Knowledge and Human Interests
3375:Rankean historical positivism
2156:Audi, Robert (9 March 2002).
1852:Riofrio, Juan Carlos (2019).
1483:PhÀnomenologische Forschungen
1181:Evidence-based medical ethics
479:problem of underdetermination
144:problem of underdetermination
4157:
3823:A General View of Positivism
2655:"Confirmation and Induction"
2449:10.1007/978-1-4419-9863-7_86
2422:(PhD thesis). Syracuse, NY:
1936:Williamson, Timothy (2002).
1251:Policy-based evidence making
539:Bayesian confirmation theory
167:Other fields, including the
128:theory of general relativity
4023:Conjectures and Refutations
3855:The Logic of Modern Physics
3672:Deductive-nomological model
1948:10.1093/019925656X.001.0001
1942:. Oxford University Press.
1454:10.1007/978-94-011-9616-1_1
1146:Evidence-based conservation
987:Philosophic burden of proof
4236:
3983:The Poverty of Historicism
3879:The Universe in a Nutshell
3863:Language, Truth, and Logic
3847:The Analysis of Sensations
2738:Journal of Literary Theory
2274:10.1628/003181510791058920
1693:. Oxford University Press.
1216:Evidence-based prosecution
1166:Evidence-based legislation
1067:Specific types of evidence
980:
898:
829:
613:positive-instance approach
529:positive-instance approach
29:
4191:
4063:The Rhetoric of Economics
3749:
3744:Positivist-related debate
3738:
3302:
3136:Parsimony (Occam's razor)
2595:Talbott, William (2016).
2574:10.1007/s10838-006-1065-0
2341:10.1007/s11097-006-9043-x
2256:Luckner, Andreas (2010).
2096:"Propositional attitudes"
2027:Dougherty, Trent (2011).
1989:10.1007/s11098-008-9233-1
1394:. Metzler. Archived from
1221:Evidence-based toxicology
1176:Evidence-based management
1141:Evidence-based assessment
1031:beyond a reasonable doubt
971:Federal Rules of Evidence
920:preponderance of evidence
32:Evidence (disambiguation)
4220:Concepts in epistemology
3999:Two Dogmas of Empiricism
3716:Structural functionalism
3642:Naturalism in literature
2818:Stemmer, Nathan (1981).
2779:Culler, Madison (1995).
2622:Franklin, James (2011).
2528:"Scientific Objectivity"
2287:Husserl, Edmund (1965).
2262:Philosophische Rundschau
1971:Piazza, Tommaso (2009).
1904:Huemer, Michael (2019).
1796:Crupi, Vincenzo (2021).
1690:Epistemology: New Essays
1371:EnzyklopÀdie Philosophie
1161:Evidence-based education
1151:Evidence-based dentistry
535:Probabilistic approaches
417:In philosophy of science
4126:Willard Van Orman Quine
3839:Idealism and Positivism
3431:Critique of metaphysics
3365:Sociological positivism
2979:EncyclopĂŠdia Britannica
2709:Encyclopedia Britannica
2597:"Bayesian Epistemology"
2394:Encyclopedia Britannica
2362:Stanford, Kyle (2017).
2069:Encyclopedia Britannica
1477:Stenger, Georg (1996).
1271:Theory of justification
1211:Evidence-based practice
1201:Evidence-based policing
1186:Evidence-based medicine
600:Hypothetico-deductivism
524:hypothetico-deductivism
360:Willard Van Orman Quine
205:circumstantial evidence
190:, evidence consists in
188:hypothetico-deductivism
4171:
4140:Concepts in contention
3781:
3771:
3761:
3652:Objectivity in science
3550:Non-Euclidean geometry
3516:Methodological dualism
3477:
2982:(11th ed.). 1911.
2304:Diehl, Ulrich (2005).
2293:. Felix Meiner Verlag.
1616:Kelly, Thomas (2016).
1191:Evidence-based nursing
942:
896:
865:experimenter's regress
816:
784:
755:
690:
585:
537:, also referred to as
519:probabilistic approach
409:
50:
4047:The Poverty of Theory
3667:Philosophy of science
3556:Uncertainty principle
3191:Theories of deduction
2785:Philosophy of Science
2750:10.1515/jlt-2016-0003
2556:Dogan, Aysel (2005).
2125:Audi, Robert (2003).
2100:www.rep.routledge.com
2010:Audi, Robert (2001).
1977:Philosophical Studies
1871:10.32082/fp.v3i53.219
1643:Ho, Hock Lai (2015).
1307:Philosophy of Science
1231:Hierarchy of evidence
1206:Evidence-based policy
1156:Evidence-based design
1088:Relationship evidence
1033:. Similarly, in most
983:Legal burden of proof
936:
890:
846:statistical inference
817:
815:{\displaystyle white}
785:
756:
691:
586:
448:private mental states
432:scientific hypotheses
271:philosophy of science
241:legal burden of proof
177:statistical inference
152:intellectual evidence
116:scientific hypotheses
103:philosophy of science
40:
4055:The Scientific Image
3726:Structuration theory
3689:Qualitative research
3590:Criticism of science
3585:Critical rationalism
3521:Problem of induction
2230:Ströker, Elisabeth.
1440:Brand, Gerd (1955).
1098:Testimonial evidence
1029:until proven guilty
794:
783:{\displaystyle swan}
765:
700:
623:
545:
225:documentary evidence
30:For other uses, see
4031:One-Dimensional Man
3479:Geisteswissenschaft
3462:Confirmation holism
3018:Philosophical logic
2424:Syracuse University
1093:Scientific evidence
1078:Personal experience
1055:In a philosophical
911:Admissible evidence
850:Scientific evidence
832:Scientific evidence
493:through different,
463:Logical positivists
364:logical positivists
71:, evidence is what
4106:Hans-Georg Gadamer
3907:Alexander Bogdanov
3783:Positivismusstreit
3578:Post-behavioralism
3542:history of science
3394:Principal concepts
3350:Logical positivism
3082:Unity of opposites
2323:Noë, Alva (2007).
1731:Mittag, Daniel M.
1446:Welt, Ich und Zeit
1398:on 20 October 2021
1241:Mathematical proof
1236:Logical positivism
1136:Evidence packaging
943:
897:
877:anecdotal evidence
812:
780:
751:
686:
581:
498:conceptual schemes
368:Timothy Williamson
251:Nature of evidence
161:empirical evidence
82:to hold a certain
51:
4200:
4199:
4187:
4186:
4183:
4182:
4081:Theodor W. Adorno
3897:Richard Avenarius
3773:Werturteilsstreit
3734:
3733:
3682:Sense-data theory
3380:Polish positivism
3355:Positivist school
3262:
3261:
3114:List of fallacies
3099:Explanatory power
3026:Critical thinking
2892:on 19 August 2010
2628:Sydney Law Review
2458:978-1-4419-9863-7
2185:Husserl, Edmund.
2050:978-0-19-172868-6
1957:978-0-19-159867-8
1463:978-94-011-9616-1
1357:978-1-4987-5206-0
1083:Physical evidence
1027:presumed innocent
617:first-order logic
611:According to the
459:temporal priority
237:questions of fact
229:physical evidence
213:rules of evidence
140:scientific method
78:or what makes it
16:(Redirected from
4227:
4176:
4162:
4086:Gaston Bachelard
4007:Truth and Method
3991:World Hypotheses
3871:The Two Cultures
3786:
3776:
3766:
3751:
3740:
3482:
3436:Unity of science
3345:Legal positivism
3304:
3289:
3282:
3275:
3266:
3244:Platonic realism
3011:
3004:
2997:
2988:
2983:
2975:
2973:"Evidence"
2952:
2938:
2925:Zalta, Edward N.
2902:
2901:
2899:
2897:
2882:
2876:
2875:
2873:
2871:
2854:
2848:
2847:
2815:
2809:
2808:
2776:
2770:
2769:
2729:
2720:
2719:
2717:
2715:
2701:
2695:
2694:
2692:
2690:
2684:Oxford Reference
2676:
2670:
2669:
2667:
2665:
2650:
2644:
2643:
2641:
2639:
2619:
2613:
2612:
2610:
2608:
2592:
2586:
2585:
2553:
2544:
2543:
2541:
2539:
2523:
2517:
2516:
2514:
2512:
2496:
2490:
2489:
2487:
2485:
2469:
2463:
2462:
2434:
2428:
2427:
2411:
2405:
2404:
2402:
2400:
2386:
2380:
2379:
2377:
2375:
2359:
2353:
2352:
2335:(1â2): 231â245.
2320:
2314:
2313:
2301:
2295:
2294:
2284:
2278:
2277:
2253:
2247:
2246:
2244:
2242:
2227:
2221:
2220:
2218:
2216:
2201:
2195:
2194:
2182:
2173:
2172:
2170:
2168:
2153:
2147:
2146:
2122:
2116:
2115:
2113:
2111:
2091:
2085:
2084:
2082:
2080:
2061:
2055:
2054:
2024:
2018:
2017:
2007:
2001:
2000:
1968:
1962:
1961:
1933:
1922:
1921:
1919:
1917:
1901:
1892:
1891:
1873:
1849:
1840:
1839:
1837:
1835:
1828:www.worldcat.org
1820:
1814:
1813:
1811:
1809:
1793:
1770:
1769:
1759:
1748:
1747:
1745:
1743:
1728:
1722:
1721:
1719:
1717:
1701:
1695:
1694:
1684:
1661:
1660:
1658:
1656:
1640:
1634:
1633:
1631:
1629:
1613:
1564:
1563:
1561:
1559:
1547:DiFate, Victor.
1544:
1507:
1506:
1474:
1468:
1467:
1437:
1426:
1414:
1408:
1407:
1405:
1403:
1385:
1376:
1375:
1365:
1359:
1345:
1339:
1338:
1298:
1276:Validity (logic)
1073:Digital evidence
1035:civil procedures
959:chain of custody
916:reasonable doubt
860:all challenges.
821:
819:
818:
813:
789:
787:
786:
781:
760:
758:
757:
752:
695:
693:
692:
687:
590:
588:
587:
582:
487:theory-ladenness
412:
402:In phenomenology
356:Bertrand Russell
344:test of evidence
179:are generated).
148:theory-ladenness
21:
4235:
4234:
4230:
4229:
4228:
4226:
4225:
4224:
4205:
4204:
4201:
4196:
4179:
4135:
4101:Paul Feyerabend
4096:Wilhelm Dilthey
4069:
3946:
3885:
3802:
3745:
3730:
3677:Ramsey sentence
3632:Instrumentalism
3561:
3539:
3537:paradigm shifts
3530:
3467:Critical theory
3445:
3441:Verificationism
3389:
3385:Russian Machism
3333:
3298:
3293:
3263:
3258:
3229:Logical atomism
3185:
3078:Socratic method
3029:
3020:
3015:
2970:
2941:
2923:
2911:
2906:
2905:
2895:
2893:
2884:
2883:
2879:
2869:
2867:
2856:
2855:
2851:
2817:
2816:
2812:
2778:
2777:
2773:
2731:
2730:
2723:
2713:
2711:
2703:
2702:
2698:
2688:
2686:
2678:
2677:
2673:
2663:
2661:
2652:
2651:
2647:
2637:
2635:
2621:
2620:
2616:
2606:
2604:
2594:
2593:
2589:
2555:
2554:
2547:
2537:
2535:
2525:
2524:
2520:
2510:
2508:
2498:
2497:
2493:
2483:
2481:
2471:
2470:
2466:
2459:
2436:
2435:
2431:
2413:
2412:
2408:
2398:
2396:
2388:
2387:
2383:
2373:
2371:
2361:
2360:
2356:
2322:
2321:
2317:
2303:
2302:
2298:
2286:
2285:
2281:
2255:
2254:
2250:
2240:
2238:
2229:
2228:
2224:
2214:
2212:
2204:Janssen, Paul.
2203:
2202:
2198:
2184:
2183:
2176:
2166:
2164:
2155:
2154:
2150:
2124:
2123:
2119:
2109:
2107:
2093:
2092:
2088:
2078:
2076:
2063:
2062:
2058:
2051:
2026:
2025:
2021:
2009:
2008:
2004:
1970:
1969:
1965:
1958:
1935:
1934:
1925:
1915:
1913:
1903:
1902:
1895:
1858:Forum Prawnicze
1851:
1850:
1843:
1833:
1831:
1822:
1821:
1817:
1807:
1805:
1795:
1794:
1773:
1761:
1760:
1751:
1741:
1739:
1733:"Evidentialism"
1730:
1729:
1725:
1715:
1713:
1703:
1702:
1698:
1686:
1685:
1664:
1654:
1652:
1642:
1641:
1637:
1627:
1625:
1615:
1614:
1567:
1557:
1555:
1546:
1545:
1510:
1476:
1475:
1471:
1464:
1439:
1438:
1429:
1415:
1411:
1401:
1399:
1387:
1386:
1379:
1367:
1366:
1362:
1346:
1342:
1300:
1299:
1290:
1285:
1280:
1111:
1069:
993:burden of proof
989:
981:Main articles:
979:
977:Burden of proof
955:
931:
907:burden of proof
903:
885:
848:are generated.
834:
828:
792:
791:
763:
762:
698:
697:
621:
620:
543:
542:
511:
495:incommensurable
444:uncontroversial
436:neutral arbiter
419:
404:
376:
374:In epistemology
352:
294:
292:Characteristics
258:
253:
136:uncontroversial
35:
28:
23:
22:
15:
12:
11:
5:
4233:
4231:
4223:
4222:
4217:
4207:
4206:
4198:
4197:
4192:
4189:
4188:
4185:
4184:
4181:
4180:
4178:
4177:
4168:
4163:
4154:
4149:
4143:
4141:
4137:
4136:
4134:
4133:
4128:
4123:
4118:
4113:
4108:
4103:
4098:
4093:
4088:
4083:
4077:
4075:
4071:
4070:
4068:
4067:
4059:
4051:
4043:
4035:
4027:
4019:
4011:
4003:
3995:
3987:
3979:
3971:
3963:
3954:
3952:
3948:
3947:
3945:
3944:
3939:
3934:
3929:
3924:
3922:Ămile Durkheim
3919:
3914:
3909:
3904:
3899:
3893:
3891:
3887:
3886:
3884:
3883:
3875:
3867:
3859:
3851:
3843:
3835:
3827:
3819:
3810:
3808:
3804:
3803:
3801:
3800:
3794:
3788:
3778:
3768:
3763:Methodenstreit
3757:
3755:
3747:
3746:
3743:
3736:
3735:
3732:
3731:
3729:
3728:
3723:
3718:
3713:
3712:
3711:
3704:Social science
3701:
3696:
3691:
3686:
3685:
3684:
3679:
3674:
3664:
3659:
3657:Operationalism
3654:
3649:
3644:
3639:
3634:
3629:
3624:
3623:
3622:
3617:
3612:
3607:
3602:
3592:
3587:
3582:
3581:
3580:
3569:
3567:
3566:Related topics
3563:
3562:
3560:
3559:
3553:
3546:
3544:
3532:
3531:
3529:
3528:
3523:
3518:
3513:
3508:
3503:
3498:
3493:
3488:
3483:
3474:
3472:Falsifiability
3469:
3464:
3459:
3457:Antipositivism
3453:
3451:
3447:
3446:
3444:
3443:
3438:
3433:
3428:
3423:
3418:
3413:
3408:
3403:
3397:
3395:
3391:
3390:
3388:
3387:
3382:
3377:
3372:
3367:
3362:
3360:Postpositivism
3357:
3352:
3347:
3341:
3339:
3335:
3334:
3332:
3331:
3326:
3321:
3316:
3310:
3308:
3300:
3299:
3294:
3292:
3291:
3284:
3277:
3269:
3260:
3259:
3257:
3256:
3251:
3246:
3241:
3236:
3231:
3226:
3221:
3216:
3211:
3206:
3201:
3199:Constructivism
3195:
3193:
3187:
3186:
3184:
3183:
3178:
3173:
3168:
3163:
3158:
3153:
3148:
3143:
3138:
3133:
3128:
3123:
3118:
3117:
3116:
3106:
3101:
3096:
3091:
3086:
3085:
3084:
3066:
3061:
3056:
3051:
3046:
3041:
3035:
3033:
3031:informal logic
3022:
3021:
3016:
3014:
3013:
3006:
2999:
2991:
2985:
2984:
2968:
2962:
2953:
2939:
2921:
2910:
2909:External links
2907:
2904:
2903:
2877:
2849:
2830:(3): 395â404.
2810:
2797:10.1086/289886
2791:(4): 561â579.
2771:
2721:
2696:
2671:
2653:Huber, Franz.
2645:
2614:
2587:
2568:(2): 243â259.
2545:
2518:
2491:
2464:
2457:
2429:
2406:
2381:
2354:
2315:
2296:
2279:
2248:
2236:Schwabe online
2222:
2210:Schwabe online
2196:
2191:www.textlog.de
2174:
2148:
2137:(1): 177â180.
2117:
2094:Oppy, Graham.
2086:
2056:
2049:
2019:
2002:
1983:(2): 311â324.
1963:
1956:
1923:
1893:
1841:
1815:
1798:"Confirmation"
1771:
1749:
1723:
1706:"Epistemology"
1696:
1662:
1635:
1565:
1508:
1469:
1462:
1427:
1409:
1377:
1360:
1340:
1319:10.1086/392819
1287:
1286:
1284:
1281:
1279:
1278:
1273:
1268:
1263:
1258:
1253:
1248:
1243:
1238:
1233:
1228:
1226:Falsifiability
1223:
1218:
1213:
1208:
1203:
1198:
1193:
1188:
1183:
1178:
1173:
1168:
1163:
1158:
1153:
1148:
1143:
1138:
1133:
1128:
1123:
1118:
1112:
1110:
1107:
1106:
1105:
1103:Trace evidence
1100:
1095:
1090:
1085:
1080:
1075:
1068:
1065:
1015:criminal trial
1008:
1007:
1004:
978:
975:
954:
951:
930:
927:
901:Evidence (law)
899:Main article:
884:
881:
830:Main article:
827:
824:
811:
808:
805:
802:
799:
779:
776:
773:
770:
750:
747:
744:
741:
738:
735:
732:
729:
726:
723:
720:
717:
714:
711:
708:
705:
685:
682:
679:
676:
673:
670:
667:
664:
661:
658:
655:
652:
649:
646:
643:
640:
637:
634:
631:
628:
580:
577:
574:
571:
568:
565:
562:
559:
556:
553:
550:
510:
507:
418:
415:
410:selbst-gegeben
403:
400:
375:
372:
351:
348:
340:
339:
336:
333:
330:
323:
322:
319:
316:
312:
309:
306:
293:
290:
257:
254:
252:
249:
245:capital crimes
26:
24:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
4232:
4221:
4218:
4216:
4213:
4212:
4210:
4203:
4195:
4190:
4175:
4174:
4169:
4167:
4164:
4161:
4160:
4155:
4153:
4150:
4148:
4145:
4144:
4142:
4138:
4132:
4129:
4127:
4124:
4122:
4119:
4117:
4116:György Lukåcs
4114:
4112:
4109:
4107:
4104:
4102:
4099:
4097:
4094:
4092:
4089:
4087:
4084:
4082:
4079:
4078:
4076:
4072:
4065:
4064:
4060:
4057:
4056:
4052:
4049:
4048:
4044:
4041:
4040:
4036:
4033:
4032:
4028:
4025:
4024:
4020:
4017:
4016:
4012:
4009:
4008:
4004:
4001:
4000:
3996:
3993:
3992:
3988:
3985:
3984:
3980:
3977:
3976:
3972:
3969:
3968:
3964:
3961:
3960:
3956:
3955:
3953:
3949:
3943:
3942:Vienna Circle
3940:
3938:
3937:Berlin Circle
3935:
3933:
3930:
3928:
3925:
3923:
3920:
3918:
3917:Eugen DĂŒhring
3915:
3913:
3912:Auguste Comte
3910:
3908:
3905:
3903:
3900:
3898:
3895:
3894:
3892:
3888:
3881:
3880:
3876:
3873:
3872:
3868:
3865:
3864:
3860:
3857:
3856:
3852:
3849:
3848:
3844:
3841:
3840:
3836:
3833:
3832:
3828:
3825:
3824:
3820:
3817:
3816:
3812:
3811:
3809:
3807:Contributions
3805:
3798:
3795:
3792:
3789:
3785:
3784:
3779:
3775:
3774:
3769:
3765:
3764:
3759:
3758:
3756:
3752:
3748:
3741:
3737:
3727:
3724:
3722:
3721:Structuralism
3719:
3717:
3714:
3710:
3707:
3706:
3705:
3702:
3700:
3697:
3695:
3692:
3690:
3687:
3683:
3680:
3678:
3675:
3673:
3670:
3669:
3668:
3665:
3663:
3662:Phenomenalism
3660:
3658:
3655:
3653:
3650:
3648:
3645:
3643:
3640:
3638:
3635:
3633:
3630:
3628:
3625:
3621:
3618:
3616:
3613:
3611:
3608:
3606:
3603:
3601:
3598:
3597:
3596:
3593:
3591:
3588:
3586:
3583:
3579:
3576:
3575:
3574:
3573:Behavioralism
3571:
3570:
3568:
3564:
3557:
3554:
3551:
3548:
3547:
3545:
3543:
3538:
3533:
3527:
3524:
3522:
3519:
3517:
3514:
3512:
3509:
3507:
3504:
3502:
3501:Human science
3499:
3497:
3494:
3492:
3489:
3487:
3484:
3481:
3480:
3475:
3473:
3470:
3468:
3465:
3463:
3460:
3458:
3455:
3454:
3452:
3448:
3442:
3439:
3437:
3434:
3432:
3429:
3427:
3426:Pseudoscience
3424:
3422:
3421:Justification
3419:
3417:
3414:
3412:
3409:
3407:
3404:
3402:
3399:
3398:
3396:
3392:
3386:
3383:
3381:
3378:
3376:
3373:
3371:
3368:
3366:
3363:
3361:
3358:
3356:
3353:
3351:
3348:
3346:
3343:
3342:
3340:
3336:
3330:
3327:
3325:
3322:
3320:
3317:
3315:
3312:
3311:
3309:
3305:
3301:
3297:
3290:
3285:
3283:
3278:
3276:
3271:
3270:
3267:
3255:
3252:
3250:
3247:
3245:
3242:
3240:
3237:
3235:
3232:
3230:
3227:
3225:
3222:
3220:
3217:
3215:
3212:
3210:
3207:
3205:
3202:
3200:
3197:
3196:
3194:
3192:
3188:
3182:
3179:
3177:
3174:
3172:
3169:
3167:
3164:
3162:
3159:
3157:
3154:
3152:
3149:
3147:
3144:
3142:
3139:
3137:
3134:
3132:
3129:
3127:
3124:
3122:
3119:
3115:
3112:
3111:
3110:
3107:
3105:
3102:
3100:
3097:
3095:
3092:
3090:
3087:
3083:
3079:
3075:
3072:
3071:
3070:
3067:
3065:
3062:
3060:
3057:
3055:
3052:
3050:
3047:
3045:
3042:
3040:
3037:
3036:
3034:
3032:
3027:
3023:
3019:
3012:
3007:
3005:
3000:
2998:
2993:
2992:
2989:
2981:
2980:
2974:
2969:
2966:
2963:
2961:
2957:
2954:
2950:
2949:
2944:
2940:
2936:
2935:
2930:
2926:
2922:
2920:
2916:
2913:
2912:
2908:
2891:
2887:
2881:
2878:
2866:
2862:
2861:
2853:
2850:
2845:
2841:
2837:
2833:
2829:
2825:
2821:
2814:
2811:
2806:
2802:
2798:
2794:
2790:
2786:
2782:
2775:
2772:
2767:
2763:
2759:
2755:
2751:
2747:
2743:
2739:
2735:
2728:
2726:
2722:
2710:
2706:
2700:
2697:
2685:
2681:
2675:
2672:
2660:
2656:
2649:
2646:
2633:
2629:
2625:
2618:
2615:
2602:
2598:
2591:
2588:
2583:
2579:
2575:
2571:
2567:
2563:
2559:
2552:
2550:
2546:
2533:
2529:
2522:
2519:
2506:
2502:
2495:
2492:
2479:
2475:
2468:
2465:
2460:
2454:
2450:
2446:
2442:
2441:
2433:
2430:
2425:
2421:
2417:
2410:
2407:
2395:
2391:
2385:
2382:
2369:
2365:
2358:
2355:
2350:
2346:
2342:
2338:
2334:
2330:
2326:
2319:
2316:
2311:
2307:
2300:
2297:
2292:
2291:
2283:
2280:
2275:
2271:
2267:
2263:
2259:
2252:
2249:
2237:
2233:
2226:
2223:
2211:
2207:
2200:
2197:
2192:
2188:
2181:
2179:
2175:
2163:
2159:
2152:
2149:
2144:
2140:
2136:
2132:
2128:
2121:
2118:
2105:
2101:
2097:
2090:
2087:
2074:
2070:
2066:
2060:
2057:
2052:
2046:
2042:
2038:
2034:
2030:
2023:
2020:
2015:
2014:
2006:
2003:
1998:
1994:
1990:
1986:
1982:
1978:
1974:
1967:
1964:
1959:
1953:
1949:
1945:
1941:
1940:
1932:
1930:
1928:
1924:
1911:
1907:
1900:
1898:
1894:
1889:
1885:
1881:
1877:
1872:
1867:
1863:
1859:
1855:
1848:
1846:
1842:
1829:
1825:
1819:
1816:
1803:
1799:
1792:
1790:
1788:
1786:
1784:
1782:
1780:
1778:
1776:
1772:
1767:
1766:
1758:
1756:
1754:
1750:
1738:
1734:
1727:
1724:
1711:
1707:
1700:
1697:
1692:
1691:
1683:
1681:
1679:
1677:
1675:
1673:
1671:
1669:
1667:
1663:
1650:
1646:
1639:
1636:
1623:
1619:
1612:
1610:
1608:
1606:
1604:
1602:
1600:
1598:
1596:
1594:
1592:
1590:
1588:
1586:
1584:
1582:
1580:
1578:
1576:
1574:
1572:
1570:
1566:
1554:
1550:
1543:
1541:
1539:
1537:
1535:
1533:
1531:
1529:
1527:
1525:
1523:
1521:
1519:
1517:
1515:
1513:
1509:
1504:
1500:
1496:
1492:
1489:(1): 84â106.
1488:
1484:
1480:
1473:
1470:
1465:
1459:
1455:
1451:
1447:
1443:
1436:
1434:
1432:
1428:
1424:
1423:
1418:
1417:Rudolf Eisler
1413:
1410:
1397:
1393:
1392:
1384:
1382:
1378:
1373:
1372:
1364:
1361:
1358:
1354:
1350:
1344:
1341:
1336:
1332:
1328:
1324:
1320:
1316:
1313:: S193âS207.
1312:
1308:
1304:
1297:
1295:
1293:
1289:
1282:
1277:
1274:
1272:
1269:
1267:
1264:
1262:
1259:
1257:
1256:Proof (truth)
1254:
1252:
1249:
1247:
1244:
1242:
1239:
1237:
1234:
1232:
1229:
1227:
1224:
1222:
1219:
1217:
1214:
1212:
1209:
1207:
1204:
1202:
1199:
1197:
1194:
1192:
1189:
1187:
1184:
1182:
1179:
1177:
1174:
1172:
1169:
1167:
1164:
1162:
1159:
1157:
1154:
1152:
1149:
1147:
1144:
1142:
1139:
1137:
1134:
1132:
1129:
1127:
1126:Best practice
1124:
1122:
1119:
1117:
1114:
1113:
1108:
1104:
1101:
1099:
1096:
1094:
1091:
1089:
1086:
1084:
1081:
1079:
1076:
1074:
1071:
1070:
1066:
1064:
1062:
1058:
1053:
1051:
1050:
1045:
1040:
1036:
1032:
1028:
1024:
1020:
1016:
1011:
1005:
1002:
1001:
1000:
997:
994:
988:
984:
976:
974:
972:
966:
964:
960:
952:
950:
948:
940:
935:
928:
926:
923:
921:
917:
912:
908:
902:
894:
889:
882:
880:
878:
874:
870:
866:
861:
857:
855:
851:
847:
843:
839:
833:
825:
823:
809:
806:
803:
800:
797:
777:
774:
771:
768:
745:
739:
736:
733:
730:
727:
724:
718:
712:
709:
706:
703:
677:
671:
668:
665:
662:
659:
650:
644:
641:
638:
635:
629:
618:
614:
609:
606:
605:observational
602:
601:
596:
594:
593:Alvin Goldman
575:
569:
566:
560:
557:
554:
548:
540:
536:
532:
530:
526:
525:
520:
515:
508:
506:
503:
499:
496:
492:
488:
482:
480:
475:
473:
468:
464:
460:
455:
453:
449:
445:
441:
437:
433:
430:
426:
425:
416:
414:
411:
401:
399:
396:
392:
387:
383:
381:
373:
371:
369:
365:
361:
357:
349:
347:
345:
337:
334:
331:
328:
327:
326:
320:
317:
313:
310:
307:
304:
303:
302:
298:
291:
289:
286:
282:
279:
274:
272:
268:
263:
255:
250:
248:
246:
242:
238:
234:
233:trier of fact
230:
226:
222:
218:
214:
210:
206:
202:
198:
193:
192:observational
189:
185:
180:
178:
174:
170:
165:
163:
162:
157:
153:
149:
145:
141:
137:
133:
129:
125:
121:
117:
114:
110:
109:
104:
99:
97:
93:
92:phenomenology
88:
85:
81:
77:
74:
70:
65:
63:
59:
55:
48:
44:
39:
33:
19:
4202:
4061:
4053:
4045:
4037:
4029:
4021:
4013:
4005:
3997:
3989:
3981:
3973:
3965:
3957:
3877:
3869:
3861:
3853:
3845:
3837:
3829:
3821:
3813:
3797:Science wars
3595:Epistemology
3526:Reflectivism
3486:Hermeneutics
3410:
3338:Declinations
3314:Antihumanism
3307:Perspectives
3224:Intuitionism
3209:Fictionalism
3088:
2977:
2946:
2932:
2894:. Retrieved
2890:the original
2880:
2868:. Retrieved
2859:
2852:
2827:
2823:
2813:
2788:
2784:
2774:
2744:(1): 58â82.
2741:
2737:
2712:. Retrieved
2708:
2699:
2687:. Retrieved
2683:
2674:
2662:. Retrieved
2658:
2648:
2636:. Retrieved
2631:
2627:
2617:
2605:. Retrieved
2600:
2590:
2565:
2561:
2536:. Retrieved
2531:
2521:
2509:. Retrieved
2504:
2494:
2482:. Retrieved
2477:
2467:
2439:
2432:
2419:
2409:
2397:. Retrieved
2393:
2384:
2372:. Retrieved
2367:
2357:
2332:
2328:
2318:
2309:
2299:
2289:
2282:
2268:(1): 70â83.
2265:
2261:
2251:
2239:. Retrieved
2235:
2225:
2213:. Retrieved
2209:
2199:
2190:
2165:. Retrieved
2161:
2151:
2134:
2130:
2120:
2108:. Retrieved
2099:
2089:
2077:. Retrieved
2068:
2059:
2032:
2022:
2012:
2005:
1980:
1976:
1966:
1938:
1914:. Retrieved
1909:
1906:"Sense-Data"
1861:
1857:
1832:. Retrieved
1830:(in Spanish)
1827:
1818:
1806:. Retrieved
1801:
1764:
1740:. Retrieved
1736:
1726:
1714:. Retrieved
1709:
1699:
1689:
1653:. Retrieved
1648:
1638:
1626:. Retrieved
1621:
1556:. Retrieved
1552:
1486:
1482:
1472:
1445:
1421:
1412:
1400:. Retrieved
1396:the original
1390:
1370:
1363:
1348:
1343:
1310:
1306:
1054:
1047:
1012:
1009:
998:
992:
990:
967:
963:inadmissible
956:
953:Presentation
944:
924:
904:
893:Lady Justice
875:inherent to
862:
858:
835:
612:
610:
598:
597:
534:
533:
528:
522:
518:
514:Philosophers
512:
505:this sense.
483:
476:
471:
466:
458:
456:
451:
447:
443:
439:
435:
428:
422:
420:
405:
395:Matrix movie
388:
384:
377:
353:
343:
341:
324:
299:
295:
275:
267:epistemology
259:
181:
166:
159:
156:self-evident
151:
135:
131:
112:
106:
100:
89:
69:epistemology
66:
53:
52:
4152:Objectivity
4121:Karl Popper
4111:Thomas Kuhn
4091:Mario Bunge
3842:(1879â1884)
3777:(1909â1959)
3511:Metaphysics
3491:Historicism
3406:Demarcation
3401:Consilience
3324:Rationalism
3204:Dialetheism
3094:Explanation
3064:Credibility
1049:prima facie
1019:prosecution
838:experiments
429:disconfirms
269:and in the
262:proposition
154:or what is
113:disconfirms
58:proposition
4209:Categories
3932:Ernst Mach
3927:Ernst Laas
3902:A. J. Ayer
3890:Proponents
3709:Philosophy
3506:Humanities
3450:Antitheses
3319:Empiricism
3296:Positivism
3249:Pragmatism
3239:Nominalism
3146:Propaganda
3121:Hypothesis
3074:Antithesis
2943:"Evidence"
2929:"Evidence"
2919:PhilPapers
2863:. p.
1618:"Evidence"
1549:"Evidence"
1283:References
1266:Skepticism
1131:Empiricism
1061:resolution
929:Collection
869:refutation
854:hypothesis
842:laboratory
217:admissible
184:philosophy
96:philosophy
4173:Verstehen
4159:Phronesis
4147:Knowledge
4131:Max Weber
3951:Criticism
3699:Sociology
3637:Modernism
3615:pluralism
3600:anarchism
3496:Historism
3416:Induction
3329:Scientism
3219:Formalism
3181:Vagueness
3161:Relevance
3156:Reasoning
3069:Dialectic
3044:Ambiguity
2844:148236513
2805:121195603
2766:147343629
2758:1862-8990
2634:: 545â561
2582:120030170
2241:3 October
2215:3 October
1888:229718454
1880:2081-688X
1495:0342-8117
1374:. Meiner.
1327:0031-8248
1039:plaintiff
1023:defendant
725:∧
657:→
627:∀
558:∣
502:consensus
472:epistemic
278:justifies
221:testimony
73:justifies
43:contrails
4215:Evidence
4194:Category
3610:nihilism
3605:idealism
3535:Related
3411:Evidence
3234:Logicism
3214:Finitism
3166:Rhetoric
3151:Prudence
3089:Evidence
3049:Argument
3039:Analysis
2956:Evidence
2915:Evidence
2870:11 March
2349:24597361
2104:Archived
2073:Archived
1997:56299607
1939:Evidence
1503:24360376
1335:61281250
1116:Argument
1109:See also
947:criminal
527:and the
467:semantic
424:confirms
391:rational
315:evident.
285:rational
171:and the
169:sciences
124:Einstein
108:confirms
84:doxastic
80:rational
54:Evidence
4074:Critics
3799:(1990s)
3793:(1980s)
3787:(1960s)
3767:(1890s)
3620:realism
3552:(1830s)
3540:in the
3254:Realism
3141:Premise
3131:Opinion
3126:Inquiry
3109:Fallacy
2958:at the
2927:(ed.).
2896:18 July
2714:15 June
2689:15 June
2664:6 March
2638:30 June
2607:14 June
2538:15 June
2511:15 June
2484:15 June
2399:15 June
2374:15 June
2167:15 June
2110:2 April
2079:2 April
1916:15 June
1808:13 June
1742:15 June
1716:15 June
1655:11 June
1628:11 June
1558:11 June
1422:Evidenz
1419:: Art.
1402:4 April
450:but of
380:beliefs
281:beliefs
199:of the
76:beliefs
47:airshow
4066:(1986)
4058:(1980)
4050:(1978)
4042:(1968)
4034:(1964)
4026:(1963)
4018:(1962)
4010:(1960)
4002:(1951)
3994:(1942)
3986:(1936)
3978:(1934)
3970:(1923)
3962:(1909)
3882:(2001)
3874:(1959)
3866:(1936)
3858:(1927)
3850:(1886)
3834:(1869)
3826:(1848)
3818:(1830)
3754:Method
3627:Holism
3558:(1927)
3176:Theory
3054:Belief
2842:
2803:
2764:
2756:
2580:
2455:
2347:
2047:
1995:
1954:
1886:
1878:
1864:(53).
1834:27 May
1501:
1493:
1460:
1355:
1333:
1325:
1261:Reason
1121:Belief
1057:debate
1044:arrest
1037:, the
909:lies.
790:" or "
440:public
362:, the
256:Notion
227:, and
132:public
56:for a
45:at an
41:These
18:Prover
4166:Truth
3171:Rigor
2840:S2CID
2801:S2CID
2762:S2CID
2578:S2CID
2345:S2CID
1993:S2CID
1884:S2CID
1499:JSTOR
1331:S2CID
1013:In a
840:in a
491:world
207:. In
201:truth
197:proof
120:orbit
3104:Fact
3059:Bias
2965:ASTM
2898:2008
2872:2020
2754:ISSN
2716:2021
2691:2021
2666:2021
2640:2021
2609:2021
2540:2021
2513:2021
2486:2021
2453:ISBN
2401:2021
2376:2021
2243:2021
2217:2021
2169:2021
2112:2021
2081:2021
2045:ISBN
1952:ISBN
1918:2021
1876:ISSN
1836:2023
1810:2021
1744:2021
1718:2021
1657:2021
1630:2021
1560:2021
1491:ISSN
1458:ISBN
1404:2022
1353:ISBN
1323:ISSN
1046:), "
991:The
985:and
873:bias
567:>
442:and
158:and
134:and
62:true
3028:and
2917:at
2832:doi
2793:doi
2746:doi
2570:doi
2445:doi
2337:doi
2270:doi
2139:doi
2037:doi
1985:doi
1981:145
1944:doi
1866:doi
1450:doi
1315:doi
1025:is
939:FBI
937:An
883:Law
427:or
209:law
173:law
126:'s
111:or
101:In
90:In
67:In
4211::
3080:,
3076:,
2976:.
2945:.
2931:.
2838:.
2828:11
2826:.
2822:.
2799:.
2789:62
2787:.
2783:.
2760:.
2752:.
2742:10
2740:.
2736:.
2724:^
2707:.
2682:.
2657:.
2632:33
2630:.
2626:.
2599:.
2576:.
2566:36
2564:.
2560:.
2548:^
2530:.
2503:.
2476:.
2451:.
2418:.
2392:.
2366:.
2343:.
2331:.
2327:.
2308:.
2266:57
2264:.
2260:.
2234:.
2208:.
2189:.
2177:^
2160:.
2135:67
2133:.
2129:.
2102:.
2098:.
2071:.
2067:.
2043:.
2031:.
1991:.
1979:.
1975:.
1950:.
1926:^
1908:.
1896:^
1882:.
1874:.
1860:.
1856:.
1844:^
1826:.
1800:.
1774:^
1752:^
1735:.
1708:.
1665:^
1647:.
1620:.
1568:^
1551:.
1511:^
1497:.
1485:.
1481:.
1456:.
1444:.
1430:^
1380:^
1329:.
1321:.
1311:67
1309:.
1305:.
1291:^
973:.
965:.
879:.
856:.
531:.
521:,
454:.
366:,
358:,
223:,
211:,
3288:e
3281:t
3274:v
3010:e
3003:t
2996:v
2951:.
2937:.
2900:.
2874:.
2865:9
2846:.
2834::
2807:.
2795::
2768:.
2748::
2718:.
2693:.
2668:.
2642:.
2611:.
2584:.
2572::
2542:.
2515:.
2488:.
2461:.
2447::
2426:.
2403:.
2378:.
2351:.
2339::
2333:6
2276:.
2272::
2245:.
2219:.
2193:.
2171:.
2145:.
2141::
2114:.
2083:.
2053:.
2039::
1999:.
1987::
1960:.
1946::
1920:.
1890:.
1868::
1862:3
1838:.
1812:.
1746:.
1720:.
1659:.
1632:.
1562:.
1505:.
1487:1
1466:.
1452::
1406:.
1337:.
1317::
810:e
807:t
804:i
801:h
798:w
778:n
775:a
772:w
769:s
749:)
746:a
743:(
740:e
737:t
734:i
731:h
728:w
722:)
719:a
716:(
713:n
710:a
707:w
704:s
684:)
681:)
678:x
675:(
672:e
669:t
666:i
663:h
660:w
654:)
651:x
648:(
645:n
642:a
639:w
636:s
633:(
630:x
579:)
576:H
573:(
570:P
564:)
561:E
555:H
552:(
549:P
407:(
34:.
20:)
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
