The phrase "adequacy condition" is correct and usable in written English.
It is typically used in contexts such as mathematics, logic, or philosophy to refer to a specific requirement that must be met for a certain conclusion or result to hold true.
Example: "In order to prove the theorem, we must first establish the adequacy condition for the proposed solution."
Alternatives: "sufficiency condition" or "satisfactory condition".
This is an adequacy condition for theories, not a theory itself.
It is presumably an adequacy condition on the interpretation of the work of any systematic philosopher that the work be interpreted in light of the central tenets of that philosopher's system.
It is then possible to give a precise version and a proof of the adequacy condition (T) in a meta-science, whose principles comprise: (i) general logical axioms, (ii) special axioms that depend upon the object theory we consider, and (iii) axioms for dealing with the fundamental properties of the structural notions, i.e., principles of proof and definition by induction.
While some consider it an adequacy condition on any solution to the embedding problem that it vindicate certain inferences as valid, others think that the task is to explain why we reason as we do (Björnsson 2001), or perhaps why it is rational to reason as we do.
This connection suggests four adequacy conditions on a functional deficit hypothesis.
Even the adoption of a better theory of laws is not enough to exonerate Hempel's adequacy conditions.
Is there an acceptance test meeting the adequacy conditions we proposed above such that we can carry out Gärdenfors's semantic program with its help?
It has been held that it can be proven that there is no population ethics that satisfies a set of apparently plausible adequacy conditions on such a theory.
In the examiner's sense of knowledge Ian Hacking identified (Hacking 1967, p. 319), to prove an adequate scientific explanation is available, it would be necessary to show that each of Hempel's adequacy conditions has been satisfied.
On the implicit proviso that \ k\) is empty (that is, tautologous: \ k = \top\)), Hempel (1943 , 1945 himself had put forward (EC) and (SCC) as compelling adequacy conditions for any theory of confirmation, and devised his own proposal accordingly.
Schemas are used in logic to specify rules of inference, in mathematics to describe theories with infinitely many axioms, and in semantics to give adequacy conditions for definitions of truth.
