{"version":"1.0","type":"rich","provider_name":"Acast","provider_url":"https://acast.com","height":250,"width":700,"html":"","title":"Does a red shoe confirm that all crows are black?","description":"What did you look at today without thinking that what you saw was proof of something, not knowing that everything you see tells the universe something about itself? There is a still raven on a pale stone at dawn, the cold still clinging to its feathers, the silence before the first flight. Hempel's paradox states that observing a black raven is evidence that all ravens are black, and that seems reasonable. But the same hypothesis states that everything that is not black is not a raven, and its logically equivalent form is confirmed by anything that is not black and is not a raven. A red shoe, a white cloud, a yellow stone are all valid pieces of evidence that all ravens are black, according to logic. Carl Gustav Hempel published this in nineteen forty-five and called that result the confirmation paradox, without resolving whether logic or intuition was wrong. If seeing a red shoe confirms something about ravens, then all the logic of evidence needs a new foundation.\r\n\r\nThis episode was created with artificial intelligence: AI-assisted script and AI-generated (synthetic) voice.","author_name":"Creators Obomedia"}