Waterfall, his view, unable to answer his question. Solution is the kind one would expect, that is

Waterfall in his article asks is there, and if so what it is, a solid logical foundation that provides criteria to confirm madame curie or Riaoa so that you can determine how you can say that E confirms observation (\ disprove) the hypothesis H. In other words, the purpose of the waterfall is a confirmation to the concept of land set and solid like the one on which rests deduction. In light of this objective can be expected that the response of the falls will be in the form of a formal structure to provide a valid logical definition of affirmation and shall establish criteria to allow disease madame curie to determine when the inductive inference (in the form of affirmation) is valid as I can do for deductive inference. Hempel also asks whether our intuitive understanding of the concept of confirmation (as Nico criterion or predictive) has to go on, and whether and how to remedy. madame curie
Waterfall background work on logical madame curie positivism transition in absolute concept of validation (or refutation) hypothesis softened relations concept of confirmation (or Riaoa). But his point is that this problem is not solved, because now there is the concept validation set and attitude it maintains between observation and hypothesis, or between the individual madame curie case and inclusion. Formal criteria for identifying opinion the concept madame curie of confirmation is critical madame curie to provide the scientific procedure of confirmation of the hypotheses are valid logical foundations, like the deduction. In other words, madame curie since empiricism requires madame curie scientific information to be based on observation, and since logic demands that the relations between the two verses will be the structure is valid, then empiricism logical looking for a logical structure that expresses the relationship between observation and general law and buy valid procedure, scientific and information obtained by it.
Waterfall, his view, unable to answer his question. Solution is the kind one would expect, that is a logical structure madame curie or formal criteria defining the concept of confirmation. Waterfall methodology used is essentially to identify necessary conditions for concept validation and then try to offer a definition that meets them, this method tries to ensure reformulation of the concept of confirmation that will be characterized by logical disabilities that are the lot of the common criteria, more intuitive. Finally waterfall suggests criteria detailing what cases and under what conditions it is argued that the relationship between verse Observation B hypothesis H expresses the ratio of affirmation, Riaoa or neutral. On the other hand you can argue that the waterfall did not give a satisfactory answer because the definition be limited Luca confirmed madame curie the hypothesis containing only observational terms, as the Israel Scheffler, and therefore the solution of the waterfall madame curie is actually incomplete.
At this waterfall offers observe the criteria cleaned. According to the criterion of Nico any evidence confirming all positive negative view Mraat hypothesis of the "A implies B". Positive view is any case in which includes A and B, A negative view will be provided free of B, and neutral vision will not-A. Putting this criterion madame curie tries Nico (as quoted in an article by the waterfall) to answer the question how can an individual madame curie case affect the probability ("probability") of the rules. This question is fundamentally semantic because it seeks to identify the relationship between object observational rule which expresses a hypothesis, that is, the ratio of foreign tongue.
The main objection of the waterfall Nico as a necessary criterion based on confirmed diagnosis Slkritrion has a logical flaw in that kind of vision to provide confirmation of the hypothesis under that criterion cleaned depends not only software but also phrasing and different formulations of the same logically equivalent hypothesis recovers or Iroao by various observations. Thus, due to the requirement of equivalence madame curie as a necessary confirmation, can not accept the criteria cleaned. A second objection madame curie against receipt of the waterfall as a necessary criterion for Nico's foolishness stems confirmation criterion hypothesis of a general condition but not the hypothesis with discounts sixes, since it can be a prerequisite criterion only a certain type of hypotheses and it does not provide madame curie a complete definition of the concept of confirmation. Hempel claims that criterion also cleaned can not be a sufficient condition to confirm, because the development along with his logical equivalence requirement leads to another trial a logical equivalence hypothesis: "All madame curie A or not A is either A or B is not." It follows that the hypothesis can be substantiated by any case it is A and B or A. The result criterion Nico confirmation hypothesis that all crows black book can be found in yellow, orange ball, etc., and it seems we have a paradoxical conclusion.
Hempel's paradox solution Ravens not include repair of the logical structure confirmation (after madame curie attempts to add Article existence and field application failed), but in fact his settlement with the intuitive common sense which is, according to the falls, from the outset source paradoxical feeling. Hempel argues that fundamental error sense of paradox is the belief that a statement such as "All A is B" refers madame curie only to objects of type A, when the truth is refers to all the objects which are to distribute them to A and therefore B or not-A. madame curie So any object that fits into one of these categories confirms the hypothesis. Another argument of the waterfall is paradoxical appearances were due to a combination of prior knowledge of the experiment, Cbdogmt ice hypothesis tested as part of "All hands Hgfratiim yellow flame burning," madame curie If we did not know in advance that ice waterfall claims, madame curie the conclusion would not we look paradoxical.
Hempel's paradox is due to the ratio between the conclusion of a valid logic and human psychology perceives madame curie it intuitively absurd, and therefore would be a solution to the contradictions between logic and intuition through analysis and repair of one or both. Seeing that you can not reach a solution through the correction logic of confirmation waterfall leaving madame curie it on the barrel and out appease intuition and point out her mistake and therefore supposedly solves the paradox. But I think the paradox does not include only the logic and intuition, but it contains a third component which is directly affecting and methodology of scientific procedure. Mode shows the waterfall answer when loaded special case confirms \ Mraa general madame curie rule will be "always" all possible object is visually madame curie relevant hypothesis, impossible situation pragmatically. Another problem I think the solution of the waterfall is that he actually rejects