A Note on Hempel's Paradox

preprint OA: closed CC-BY-4.0

Abstract

In this paper, Hempel’s paradox is revisited, a paradox that arises from the observation of a black raven which inductively confirms the generalization “All ravens are black”, but can also be interpreted as supporting the statement “All swans are white”. The proposed resolution leverages the non-monotonic nature of inductive inference, suggesting that two distinct inferences from the same observation are not required to yield the same outcome. This exploration underscores the importance of the non-monotonic nature of induction, hinting at its reflection of the contextual and situated nature of human knowledge. There are many underlying epistemological questions that I do not consider here for the sake of simplicity. I have dealt with them in previous works. Of course all these remarks are only a sketch of a better developed theory that is still to be realized.
Full text 621 characters · extracted from oa-doi-fallback · click to expand
There is a newer version available for this {{ publicationType }}. View latest version {{ publication.field_name }} {{ publication.subfield_name }} Copyright: © {{ publicationYear }} {{ publication.presentation_authors[0].full_name + (publication.presentation_authors.length > 1 ? ' et al' : '') }}. This is an open access publication distributed under the terms of the CC BY 4.0 License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Check the {{ publicationType | capitalize }} Source for copyright and license information. Listen on

Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below. Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy (via DOI) is the canonical version.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Ask this paper AI returns verbatim quotes from the full text · source: oa-doi-fallback

Answers must be backed by verbatim quotes from this paper's full text. Hallucinated quotes are dropped automatically; if no verbatim passage answers the question, we say so. How this works

Citation neighborhood (no data yet)

We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. This is a recent paper (2026) — citers typically take a year or two to land, and the OpenAlex reference graph may still be filling in.

Source provenance

europepmc
last seen: 2026-05-20T01:45:00.602351+00:00
unpaywall
last seen: 2026-05-20T11:00:21.680559+00:00
License: CC-BY-4.0