Daniel G. Campos

On the distinction between Peirce’s abduction and Lipton’s Inference to the best explanation

I argue against the tendency in the philosophy of science literature to link abduction to the inference to the best explanation (IBE), and in particular, to claim that Peircean abduction is a conceptual predecessor to IBE. This is not to discount either abduction or IBE. Rather the purpose of this paper is to clarify the relation between Peircean abduction and IBE in accounting for ampliative inference in science. This paper aims at a proper classification—not justification—of types of scientific reasoning. In particular, I claim that Peircean abduction is an in-depth account of the process of generating explanatory hypotheses, while IBE, at least in Peter Lipton’s thorough treatment, is a more encompassing account of the processes both of generating and of evaluating scientific hypotheses. There is then a two-fold problem with the claim that abduction is IBE. On the one hand, it conflates abduction and induction, which are two distinct forms of logical inference, with two distinct aims, as shown by Charles S. Peirce; on the other hand it lacks a clear sense of the full scope of IBE as an account of scientific inference.

The Logic of Medical Diagnosis

Establishing diagnoses is a crucial aspect of medical practice. However, this process has received comparatively little logical and pedagogical attention when compared to statistical methods for evaluating evidence. This article investigates the logic of medical diagnosis in order to fill this void. It is organized in three parts: the first attempts to explain why more attention ought to be paid to diagnosis, at least as much as to evidence; the second calls attention to the method of diagnosis by abductive reasoning developed in the 19th century by Charles Sanders Peirce (1839-1914); and the third demonstrates the use and pervasiveness of abduction by any other name in clinical diagnosis. We examine six diagnostic strategies in common use that contain most, if not all, of Peirces structure of inquiry in science.

On the Value and Meaning of Football: Recent Philosophical Perspectives in Latin America

The author <dcampos@brooklyn.cuny.edu> is with the Dept. of Philosophy, Brooklyn College, City University of New York, Brooklyn, NY 11210. Given the popularity, professionalization, and commercialization of association football in Latin America, it is not surprising that this sport receives considerable intellectual scrutiny in the region. One philosophically significant and socially relevant question is how the widespread practice of and attention to this sport may be valuable and meaningful. This issue is particularly pressing in Latin American society, and in general, in societies where there is great social injustice and economic need while a considerable amount of the citizens’ attention and large sums of money are directed toward the business of professional football. The question, moreover, may be broached from a variety of disciplines and perspectives. For instance, in his book Veneno remédio: O futebol e o Brasil (28), an essay in cultural criticism, Professor José Wisnik of the University of São Paulo, Brazil, discusses the value and meaning of association football in Brazilian culture. This work is truly an essay, not an academic monograph—drawing from historical, sociological, literary, and philosophical sources, as well as personal experience, the writer develops some general critical ideas on the importance of futebol in Brazilian culture. The essay is, nonetheless, of interest to philosophers of sport because of the centrality of philosophical considerations in Wisnik’s investigation. Entitled, in rough translation, Medicinal Poison: Football and Brazil, it defends the valuable function and legitimate meaning of the practice of football in Brazil against charges that this widely practiced and followed sport is the opium (or poison) of the uncultured, uneducated, and/or nihilistic masses. In this essay, I propose to discuss critically some recent attempts at addressing philosophically the question in works published in Latin America. In particular, I will evaluate works that defend the value of football by first distinguishing the sport itself from the socioeconomic and political context that surrounds its practice, and second linking this value in some way to creative cultural expression.2 In what follows, I will first summarize the main arguments in Wisnik’s text. Second, I will offer some critical suggestions for engaging and developing the philosophical purport of that text drawing from existing literature in the philosophy of sport. Third, I will discuss Jesús Ilundáin’s alternative philosophical approach to the question (2). Finally, I will offer some general suggestions for how this issue might be investigated in future studies. My principal aim is to On the Value and Meaning of Football: Recent Philosophical Perspectives in Latin America1

The Framing of the Fundamental Probability Set: A Historical Case Study on the Context of Mathematical Discovery

I address the philosophical debate over whether the mathematical theory of probability arose on the basis of empirical observations or of purely theoretical speculations. The debate tends to pose a strict dichotomy between empirical problem-solving and pure theorizing. I alternatively suggest that, in the case of mathematical probability, an empirical problem-context acted as an enabling condition for the possibility of mathematical innovation, but that the activity of the early mathematical probabilists gradually became the study of a theoretical system of ideas. This case has some implications for a more general philosophical view on the context of mathematical discovery.

Beyond ‘crude pragmatism’ in sports coaching: Insights from C.S. Peirce, William James, and John Dewey: A commentary

A central aim of Simon Jenkins’s article is to provide coaching theorists-practitioners with a clearer understanding of philosophical pragmatism as a viable approach to coaching—an approach that is both intellectually well funded and effective for achieving desired goals. By clarifying, Jenkins also seeks to recommend this way of coaching. For him, philosophical pragmatism would lead to better coaching than ‘‘crude pragmatism’’ because it is not merely practicalist—that is, focused on short-term results through ad hoc fashionable coaching techniques (techne). It is rather a method, facilitated by a distinctive temperament and guided by practical wisdom (phronesis), that emphasizes goaldirected experimentation, observation of results, individual and communal reflection upon those results, and consequent revision of the assumptions, habits, goals, and purposes that leads to renewed experimentation. I think Jenkins has described successfully various elements of a well-developed pragmatist coaching practice. His conclusions, though, are brief. As a complement to his article, then, I want to offer my own descriptive summary of a pragmatist coaching practice from the specific standpoint of Peircean philosophy. I will try to articulate my general Peircean viewpoint in a clear and succinct way.

Philosophy of Sport in Latin America

The purpose of this paper is to explore the evolution of the philosophical analysis of sport in Latin America from the nineteenth century to the present. To do so, this paper identifies the main themes and the leading works that emerged throughout this period as well as their relation to regional philosophical traditions. Likewise, to situate the philosophical analysis of sport in Latin America in a broader per spective, this paper makes reference to its relation to the philosophy of sport in parts of the English-speaking world and the Iberian Peninsula (Portugal and Spain). This paper also includes an account of the character and extent of philosophical thinking in relation to sport in contemporary Latin America and speculations about the future of the discipline in the region. Given the contested nature of the notion “Latin America,” this article starts with a brief discussion of its history and meaning. This is followed by a brief account of the historical underpinnings and cultural connotations of sport in the region in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. All of this is necessary to contextualize the regional evolution of the philosophy of sport and to bring conceptual clarity to the analysis. In this regard, the intension and extension of the notion “philosophy of sport” as used in this article are also briefly discussed. Finally, it is important to clarify that the article follows the chronological development of the philosophy of sport in North America proposed by R. Scott Kretchmar. Kretchmar (26) identifies three periods in this development: the first (1875-1950) was influenced by concerns in the philosophy of education, the second (1950-1965) by competing philosophical systems, and the third (1965-1995) by the attempt to establish a specific field of inquiry based on the research methods of philosophy. Kretchmar’s chronology is useful for comparative purposes, and most important, to establish the unique trajectory of the philosophy of sport in Latin America.