We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected]
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Rudolf Carnap’s began to write on probability and inductive logic in 1945, marking a surprising shift in his research interests midway through his post-PhD career (1921–1970). His 1950 Logical Foundations of Probability is unquestionably his best-known work in this area, and yet his views afterwards underwent a substantial change over the next two decades, the extent of which was (and remains) often unappreciated. Inevitably some of his views underwent critical examination, both during his lifetime and after, but he was fortunate in being able to benefit in meeting these from the contributions and support of a number of mathematically and philosophically gifted collaborators. This essay traces the origins of his interest, the nature of these shifts, and some of the contributions of the members of his invisible college. Although the special technical contributions of Carnap continue to engage the attention of a small but influential group of individuals, his more general impact was much broader, often shaping as it did the current widespread epistemic and Bayesian view of the field.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.